The SANFL Preliminary Final fiasco

[Grapeviney 9,540]

Anyone else been following the extraordinary events in Adelaide the past couple of days?

Woodville West Torrens were about 8 goals up against North Adelaide in their Preliminary Final over the weekend.

North Adelaide came home with a wet sail and eventually won the game by 5 points. Problem was, they had 19 men on the field for some of that time, during which they scored 1.2 - enough to change the outcome of the game.

The 19th player was taken off the ground before Woodville had a chance to call for a head count, which would have seen North Adelaide lose part or all of their score.

Woodville then appealed to the tribunal, which last night slapped North Adelaide with a massive fine and docked them 8 premiership points for next season.

But the score stands and North Adelaide will play in the GF regardless. The one-man tribunal decided that while the most appropriate outcome would be to replay the game, he didn't have the power to make that ruling.

He said: "I'm of the view that as this was not deliberate, a reversal of the result is too savage a penalty."

It's a staggering outcome and if I was a Woodville supporter I would be absolutely filthy. It shouldn't matter whether it was accidental or deliberate, North Adelaide had an unfair advantage and it helped them win the game. 

The SANFL have a lot to answer for here as they could have adjudicated the matter and made the proper ruling, but instead palmed it off to the tribunal. 

Can you imagine if we lost this weekend's match under the same circumstances? I would burn down AFL House...

[daisycutter 29,343]

12 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

Anyone else been following the extraordinary events in Adelaide the past couple of days?

Woodville West Torrens were about 8 goals up against North Adelaide in their Preliminary Final over the weekend.

North Adelaide came home with a wet sail and eventually won the game by 5 points. Problem was, they had 19 men on the field for some of that time, during which they scored 1.2 - enough to change the outcome of the game.

The 19th player was taken off the ground before Woodville had a chance to call for a head count, which would have seen North Adelaide lose part or all of their score.

Woodville then appealed to the tribunal, which last night slapped North Adelaide with a massive fine and docked them 8 premiership points for next season.

But the score stands and North Adelaide will play in the GF regardless. The one-man tribunal decided that while the most appropriate outcome would be to replay the game, he didn't have the power to make that ruling.

He said: "I'm of the view that as this was not deliberate, a reversal of the result is too savage a penalty."

It's a staggering outcome and if I was a Woodville supporter I would be absolutely filthy. It shouldn't matter whether it was accidental or deliberate, North Adelaide had an unfair advantage and it helped them win the game. 

The SANFL have a lot to answer for here as they could have adjudicated the matter and made the proper ruling, but instead palmed it off to the tribunal. 

Can you imagine if we lost this weekend's match under the same circumstances? I would burn down AFL House...

if north adelaide had any integrity they would declare themselves guilty and concede the game to woodville

the decision by the one man tribunal was pathetic and gutless. replay the game - laughable

norwood should refuse to participate in the grand final

woodville should take out an injunction

 

[Wrecker45 3,378]

It had to be replayed or the result reversed.

If it were Melbourne that played too many and won as a result i’d Almost certainly be crapping on about precedent but begrudgingly accept that it unfairly affected the outcome.

[Jibroni 4,938]

28 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

Anyone else been following the extraordinary events in Adelaide the past couple of days?

Woodville West Torrens were about 8 goals up against North Adelaide in their Preliminary Final over the weekend.

North Adelaide came home with a wet sail and eventually won the game by 5 points. Problem was, they had 19 men on the field for some of that time, during which they scored 1.2 - enough to change the outcome of the game.

The 19th player was taken off the ground before Woodville had a chance to call for a head count, which would have seen North Adelaide lose part or all of their score.

It's a staggering outcome and if I was a Woodville supporter I would be absolutely filthy. It shouldn't matter whether it was accidental or deliberate, North Adelaide had an unfair advantage and it helped them win the game.  The SANFL have a lot to answer for here as they could have adjudicated the matter and made the proper ruling, but instead palmed it off to the tribunal. 

Can you imagine if we lost this weekend's match under the same circumstances? I would burn down AFL House...

 

Hey GV,

 

I was at the game supporting the Roosters and yes it has been a messy couple of days, it’s fair to say opinions have been divided.

 

To provide some background at the end of the 3^rd quarter a North player (Tropeano) went down the race for treatment and was supposed to start on the bench for the last quarter; yet the match steward did not advise him of this and he started the last qtr on the field. The total time North have 19 players was approx. 3.45 for which they scored 2 points; with another player having a shot on goal when the “19^th player” came off the field. But why it took 3.45 minutes to figure this out I have no idea and just shows how inept the SANFL competition is managed. 

 

It was a clear error by North but I don’t believe they cheated like some have described. The penalty should have been either North play the GF or they don’t. I am also convinced North still would have scored 1.2 if it were 18 v 18; but acknowledge that is not the point.

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Jibroni

[Sir Why You Little 36,674]

What an absolute disgrace. Any score during that 4 minutes should be deducted. 

Simple and Fair. 

18 players are on the ground at ANY time. 

This disgraceful decision should be appealed. 

 

Smash them Norwood..

[Redleg 40,232]

35 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

Anyone else been following the extraordinary events in Adelaide the past couple of days?

Woodville West Torrens were about 8 goals up against North Adelaide in their Preliminary Final over the weekend.

North Adelaide came home with a wet sail and eventually won the game by 5 points. Problem was, they had 19 men on the field for some of that time, during which they scored 1.2 - enough to change the outcome of the game.

The 19th player was taken off the ground before Woodville had a chance to call for a head count, which would have seen North Adelaide lose part or all of their score.

Woodville then appealed to the tribunal, which last night slapped North Adelaide with a massive fine and docked them 8 premiership points for next season.

But the score stands and North Adelaide will play in the GF regardless. The one-man tribunal decided that while the most appropriate outcome would be to replay the game, he didn't have the power to make that ruling.

He said: "I'm of the view that as this was not deliberate, a reversal of the result is too savage a penalty."

It's a staggering outcome and if I was a Woodville supporter I would be absolutely filthy. It shouldn't matter whether it was accidental or deliberate, North Adelaide had an unfair advantage and it helped them win the game. 

The SANFL have a lot to answer for here as they could have adjudicated the matter and made the proper ruling, but instead palmed it off to the tribunal. 

Can you imagine if we lost this weekend's match under the same circumstances? I would burn down AFL House...

Ring me if you need a lawyer, after they catch you.

[Sir Why You Little 36,674]

7 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Ring me if you need a lawyer, after they catch you.

“Send Lawyer’s Guns & Money ?...”

[Watts the matter 1,235]

25 minutes ago, Jibroni said:

 

Hey GV,

 

I was at the game supporting the Roosters and yes it has been a messy couple of days, it’s fair to say opinions have been divided.

 

To provide some background at the end of the 3^rd quarter a North player (Tropeano) went down the race for treatment and was supposed to start on the bench for the last quarter; yet the match steward did not advise him of this and he started the last qtr on the field. The total time North have 19 players was approx. 3.45 for which they scored 2 points; with another player having a shot on goal when the “19^th player” came off the field. But why it took 3.45 minutes to figure this out I have no idea and just shows how inept the SANFL competition is managed. 

 

It was a clear error by North but I don’t believe they cheated like some have described. The penalty should have been either North play the GF or they don’t. I am also convinced North still would have scored 1.2 if it were 18 v 18; but acknowledge that is not the point.

 

It's too simplistic to say they only scored 8 points. It's a lot harder to score against a team playing with 19 players so they have stopped WWT from scoring for that period of time which they may not have been able to do otherwise.

 

[Redleg 40,232]

11 minutes ago, Jibroni said:

 

Hey GV,

 

I was at the game supporting the Roosters and yes it has been a messy couple of days, it’s fair to say opinions have been divided.

 

To provide some background at the end of the 3^rd quarter a North player (Tropeano) went down the race for treatment and was supposed to start on the bench for the last quarter; yet the match steward did not advise him of this and he started the last qtr on the field. The total time North have 19 players was approx. 3.45 for which they scored 2 points; with another player having a shot on goal when the “19^th player” came off the field. But why it took 3.45 minutes to figure this out I have no idea and just shows how inept the SANFL competition is managed. 

 

It was a clear error by North but I don’t believe they cheated like some have described. The penalty should have been either North play the GF or they don’t. I am also convinced North still would have scored 1.2 if it were 18 v 18; but acknowledge that is not the point.

 

Apparently they have the Count Rule which must be instigated by the opposition Captain. This did not happen. The offending player left the field before this could be instigated. 

What has happened now is a post game review of an incident. There are precedents galore that can arise. A touched goal in a close win. A blatant free kick error that gifts the winning goal. A post game positive drug test.  A goal after the siren that wins the game with umpires not hearing it due to crowd noise, etc etc. 

It is a dangerous precedent post game to change the result. There will always be a loser in these instances, but it shouldn’t be the game itself.

[What 18,810]

It doesn't matter if they purposely put 19 men on the field or not.  Even if it was an accident, they should be stripped of the win.

[Sir Why You Little 36,674]

14 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

It doesn't matter if they purposely put 19 men on the field or not.  Even if it was an accident, they should be stripped of the win.

19 = 19. 

It is an 18 a side game at any time

Edited September 18, 2018 by Sir Why You Little

[Balls 31]

9 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Apparently they have the Count Rule which must be instigated by the opposition Captain. This did not happen. The offending player left the field before this could be instigated. 

What has happened now is a post game review of an incident. There are precedents galore that can arise. A touched goal in a close win. A blatant free kick error that gifts the winning goal. A post game positive drug test.  A goal after the siren that wins the game with umpires not hearing it due to crowd noise, etc etc. 

It is a dangerous precedent post game to change the result. There will always be a loser in these instances, but it shouldn’t be the game itself.

If you were presiding over the tribunal, do you think that if the Captain had called for a head count before the 19th man left the field, the 1.2 scored by North should have been deducted (and ultimately the result reversed)?

[daisycutter 29,343]

10 minutes ago, Balls said:

If you were presiding over the tribunal, do you think that if the Captain had called for a head count before the 19th man left the field, the 1.2 scored by North should have been deducted (and ultimately the result reversed)?

i think the default is to erase the total score. there is often no way for the umpire on the spot to determine the duration of extra player and score for duration

if the captain called for a count and the count was > 18 then i think the umpire has no option but to scrub the WHOLE score (for that team), then continue game

Edited September 18, 2018 by daisycutter

[Superunknown 4,075]

The captain should not have had to call for the count

 

Strip their score for the time the extra person was on the ground

if that means a loss, so be it.

 

What a schemozzle

 

 

[Redleg 40,232]

34 minutes ago, Balls said:

If you were presiding over the tribunal, do you think that if the Captain had called for a head count before the 19th man left the field, the 1.2 scored by North should have been deducted (and ultimately the result reversed)?

That is the conundrum and what I was writing about. The result being decided after the game. If the head count had taken place we wouldn’t need an after the game review.

[DeeSpencer 24,796]

I'm not a believer in tribunals altering scores. That's a slippery slope.

Unless it was a deliberate ploy 19 on the field is breaking the rules just like a push in the back, a throw or a high tackle. And you can't go back through the game vision and start awarding free kicks based on the wrong decisions. There's a process to correct 19 men on the field via a count, just as there is for umpires to pay free kicks during the game.

The 19th man had to line up either in the forward line, wing or back line and one of the opposition players should've worked out the opposition had a spare at the start of the quarter. They didn't. They were dumb. Bad luck.

I don't think you can simply deduct the 8 points days later at the Tribunal. You have to deduct the score during the game or it's too late.

The fine and suspended sentence to North Adelaide makes no sense either. Unless they deliberately cheated in which case they should be stripped of the game.

[Balls 31]

36 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i think the default is to erase the total score. there is often no way for the umpire on the spot to determine the duration of extra player and score for duration

if the captain called for a count and the count was > 18 then i think the umpire has no option but to scrub the WHOLE score (for that team), then continue game

According to the Laws of Australian Football the offending team loses their whole score, gives away a free kick and a 50-metre penalty. You may also have read there was a similar incident in the NEAFL Grand Final on the weekend where the 19th man for Southport was identified by Sydney's captain while still on the field. In that case, a decision was required in accordance with the applicable NEAFL by-law

"Where a player does not enter the playing field in accordance with these Rules, the Match Manager and/or field umpire(s) must report the circumstances to the AFL. Time and scores at the time of the breach are to be recorded. The AFL may determine the matter by way of fine, reversal of Match result or other sanction as it deems appropriate [my emphasis]."

I'm unsure what SANFL's by-laws say about the issue, but it could have been that North's score may not have been wiped automatically had they been 'caught in the act', so to speak.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,380]

I cannot for the life of me think of an easier 'open-and-shut case'... but they've completely botched it.

 

 

 

 

[tiers 2,810]

Deduct the score during the period when 19 were on the ground. Given that it was at the start of the quarter the time and score should be easy to deduce.

Simple, fair and just. Tough on North Adelaide but it's the integrity of the game that counts, not the feelings of club.

And who was the match steward? If appointed by SANFL then easier to adjudicate. A free kick and 50m against the SANFL.

[Vipercrunch 2,820]

Shocking non-decision by the SANFL.  Real amateur stuff.  Deliberate or not, one team had a massive unfair advantage for 4 minutes.  In a game decided by only 5 points, there is no way the result should have stood.  I hope Woodville unleash their lawyers.  And call for a player count every 5 minutes when they play again next year.

[Whispering_Jack 29,247]

I was involved in such a situation in junior football in the early 90s at a time when the rules of the game had just been changed to something close to what they are now. The original rule said if you had 19 players then your entire score would automatically be scrubbed. With the introduction of interchanges, it was recognised that an innocent mistake could be made and therefore the rule was changed to give the governing body (not the field umpire) to decide on the outcome.

In the case where I was involved, there had been an innocent mistake by a player who remained on the ground after the three quarter time break for about 3 minutes during which time no scores were recorded. When the count was taken at the behest of the team manager of the opposition side (and not the captain as the rules stated), the umpire took it upon himself to take off the entire score of the team with the extra player. The case went to appeal and the league compromised by taking off a portion of that team's score but the outcome was still wrong. Thankfully, the changed result did not affect the final ladders for the season but a number of officials took their eyes off the objectives of junior football and it was really as if they were playing for sheep stations.

In the current situation, the team that offended should have whatever they scored while they had 19 men on the ground deducted from the score.

[beelzebub 23,200]

Yes...sometimes a player can make an innocent or uninformed mistake. This can and has resulted in a result different to what might have been.

The rule is the rule. A little bit pregnant.. little bit dead...little bit too many players !!

Possibly splitting hairs...but you can split a hair

[Coobs 174]

Woodville were 47 points up and lost, its all just sour grape IMO

[beelzebub 23,200]

5 minutes ago, Coobs said:

Woodville were 47 points up and lost, its all just sour grape IMO

Possibly...but it's not too far fetched to suppose player dynamics were altered as a result of 19 men on the field.

If it didn't matter...there'd be no rule.

Again a pedant's argument...but it happened.

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,749]

Standing near the interchange bench during a game, one can see how easy it would be to make an error and have 19 (or 17) on the field at any time. They are running on and off, sometimes 2 or 3 at a time. Players often seem uncertain if they should go on.

Mistake or deliberate , the penalty should be to forfeit all score during the time  they breached the law.