Preliminary Final: Eagles v North - Sunday 16 September @ Adelaide Oval

Hopefully people won’t lose sight of the fact it was a highly entertaining game between two excellent sides. The fact the match contained so much drama then continues to well after the final siren makes it a game history will remember. They don’t come around too often

I'm tipping the result will be reversed.

Replay the game & give the gate takings 50/50 to both clubs

bayman wrote:Replay the game & give the gate takings 50/50 to both clubs

And disadvantage Norwood who had no hand in it?

Whatever the ruling, I think Norwood's odds have shortened dramatically after yesterday.

5 minutes is a very long time not to notice, irrespective of how many were actually in the dugout.

It would surely have to been North that caused 19 players to be on the field, so they would be primarily to blame in the first instance.

Was it the interchange steward who then noticed when North had their first interchange of the quarter? But surely the North coaches would have been aware when they made that first change.

I think the speed of the game and all of the people around the bench make it impractical to conduct a player count in the manner previously conducted (ala the Freddy Bills incident).

Perhaps a different approach dealt with there and then is necessary.
It would seem feasible that if a steward becomes aware of an interchange infringement such as 19 players on the field for 5 seconds or 5 minutes, then he should inform the reserve umpire who should then inform the main umpire who could then deal with it accordingly.

But what should the penalty be?
The range of options would seem to be "score wiped" to a simple free kick to the opposition.

I bet the rules surrounding this will get some serious attention in the off season.

Good points, Chambo.

I know the rules relating to interchanges, etc, but will stay out of this, obviously.

However, the Team Managers and Interchange Stewards are generally volunteers or on a small honorarium and do their best always.

Mistakes happen and without referring to this incident, are sometimes very understandable, so whatever the ruling, my thoughts are with the officials involved.

Flag No.10 wrote:I'm tipping the result will be reversed.

I would be surprised if it was reversed, too much at stake for the SANFL, they would get a bigger GF crowd with North in it.

LAWYERS PICNIC coming up

This is the rule it is alleged North breached

-------------------

5.1 NUMBER OF PLAYERS IN TEAM
Unless the number is varied under Law 5.2, a Team must consist of between
14 and 18 Players, who may be on the Playing Surface at any one time, and
no more than 4 Interchange Players. The Controlling Body shall determine the
actual number of Players which may play for each Team in the competitions
conducted by the Controlling Body.

-------------------


The Player Count rule is 5.5 ... separate rule clause

There is no link in the rules between the 2 clauses
meaning they are stand alone and one does not affect the other.

ie my reading (excuse the bias) is that rule 5.1 does not need 5,5 to occur to be breached. It just needs to be proven, which SANFL has done post match.

There is not mention of what happens IF Rule 5.1 is breached.

Which I assume if league finds rule has been breeched it is in their hands to decide a penalty.


For mine it is pretty clear North DID NOT breach 5.5 based on info provided, ie count not asked by captain.

But 5.1?

The SANFL rule allows 4 interchange players?

Flag No.10 wrote:The SANFL rule allows 4 interchange players?

I was told this morning that there are different rules to the Sanfl’s held by a higher authority that applies nationwide. Found it hard to believe but maybe it’s so?

Something which hasn't been mentioned is that if a player enters the field unlawfully, is it still a rule that player is to take no further part in the game.

In this case, it may be that the player is on the field illegally and once he came off and wasn't replaced, he couldn't go back on.

Not easy.

Latest announcement from the SANFL website....

The issue of North Adelaide Football Club having 19 players on the field during yesterday’s preliminary final against Woodville West Torrens has been referred to the SA Football Commission.

The Commission – the governing body of SANFL – will meet this afternoon to be briefed on the matter before deciding on the next step in the process for SANFL to reach an outcome.

No further updates from SANFL will be available until after this.

Interesting one.
Given that all the penalties assume that the game is still on when the extra man is discovered I can't see that the SANFL can declare the match a forfeit. I cannot see they have the power under the rules to do that, unless there is a clause I have missed.

Tough and unfair though it may be for the Eagles, I cannot see how the SANFL can disqualify North.

If no penalty is prescribed for this circumstance then perhaps they should look at the penalty that would apply if this breach was discovered on the field at the time; i.e. North's score at the moment the extra man was discovered (6 minute mark last quarter?) is wiped and their final score is whatever they scored from that point on.

Also, when the Eagles discovered the 19th player did they consider just going straight to one of the field umpires and calling for a count? The whole thing would have been resolved there and then in that case.

A point to note, if captain asks for count and correct 18 is found on field, captain can be reported for time wasting. Even more importantly a free kick from middle and 50m penalty is given away ... ie a shot on goal to opposition 40m straight in front. Can't be done on a whim.

Also There is no penalty perscribed for breach of rule 5.1, only 5.5

Grand Final will be between Norwood and North.

Expect some heavy financial sanctions arising from preliminary final and aftermath, and not just to North.

Lee wrote:Something which hasn't been mentioned is that if a player enters the field unlawfully, is it still a rule that player is to take no further part in the game.

In this case, it may be that the player is on the field illegally and once he came off and wasn't replaced, he couldn't go back on.

Not easy.

This is being ignored?

I think a player there might be a case that a player who stays on the ground after 3/4 time, who wasn't on the ground at the 3/4 time siren, is on the ground without being interchanged or entering through the interchange gate. Therefore once he comes off, he can't go back on.

If he did, that's another consideration.

I think it's a rule.

I thought similar Lee but "apparently" (lot of those at the moment) changes at the breaks are not considered interchanges. ie no need to go through gates coming off for start of quarter and not counted towards the interchange cap. learning a lot at the moment.

Good point, Phil. I think they don't count as 'interchanges' towards the 60 total, but the steward has to still be notified of how many changes at the breaks (at least it was 2 years ago).

Hypothetically, a player who stays on in that case hasn't entered the ground correctly, or alternatively, the player who should have come off hasn't come off correctly. When he does, I wonder if my hypothesis has merit.

Flag No.10 wrote:If no penalty is prescribed for this circumstance then perhaps they should look at the penalty that would apply if this breach was discovered on the field at the time; i.e. North's score at the moment the extra man was discovered (6 minute mark last quarter?) is wiped and their final score is whatever they scored from that point on.

Also, when the Eagles discovered the 19th player did they consider just going straight to one of the field umpires and calling for a count?  The whole thing would have been resolved there and then in that case.

Ive been at my volunteer job today .
Ive been reading the Eagles allegedly told the fourth umpire. If this is correct allegedly the Eagles did notify an umpire and nothing happened.

Scrunch wrote:

bayman wrote:Replay the game & give the gate takings 50/50 to both clubs

And disadvantage Norwood who had no hand in it?

I was thinking tomorrow night actually but just the last quarter

Whatever happens now that side will be mentally shot & Norwood will win easily

Must confess Bayman the longer this goes the more I like your last quarter mid week replay idea. Let the players sort it out rather than the lawyers,

I must say that in light of this, the whole rule 5.5 and its sections and clauses needs to be rewritten over the summer.  It doesn't say who can't call for a count.  It only says who may.

Also, given that two North players were in the change rooms at a time during the match, who requests the count if it was both Giuffreda and Thompson in the rooms?  There's no captain or acting captain or co-captain on the field?

Plus, I believe it shouldn't be up to the captain(s) that need to have that on their mind - given they are both defenders, they had already enough to deal with trying to defend an extra player.  It should really be someone like the runner.  Given that it's a final, the 4th umpire could also have gone out to an on field umpire.

That leads to another point - it says "the field umpire" regarding who the request is made to - it doesn't say "on field umpire" - the emergency field umpire is also a field umpire.

Laws and rules should be written in a way where it is 100% clear as to who, what, when, and where you can and can't do.

UBET took the odds completely off last night & have now got Norwood & North back up, not sure what it means but maybe they have to be informed beforehand