Tribunal Results and Discussions

Very good post MP. Over the past couple of seasons, I've had the misfortune to witness some very soft reports. And I believe you're correct that all we seem to be doing is following the AFL "example".

It's reaching the stage where you have your heart in your mouth each time one of your better players exercises the slightest sign of aggression.

How many players this season in the sanfl have been found guilty, contested it and won?

A reasonable number I would wager.

It is a stupid system that just gets more stupid as it emulates the afl.

I cannot fathom at all how blokes get rubbed out in the AFL for essentially what is an accident a lot of the time. If 2 players are committed to a contest and one gets their fractionally late, sometimes it is impossible to avoid contact and sometimes high.

They are changing the fabric of the game when much of this stuff cops you 2 or 3 matches.

I reckon there will be a "netball contact" rule introduced shortly.

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:How many players this season in the sanfl have been found guilty, contested it and won?

A reasonable number I would wager.

It is a stupid system that just gets more stupid as it emulates the afl.

I cannot fathom at all how blokes get rubbed out in the AFL for essentially what is an accident a lot of the time. If 2 players are committed to a contest and one gets their fractionally late, sometimes it is impossible to avoid contact and sometimes high.

They are changing the fabric of the game when much of this stuff cops you 2 or 3 matches.

I reckon there will be a "netball contact" rule introduced shortly.

absolutely spot on, although the ''netball contact'' rule could be argued that they already have it.

football is & should be a brutal but fair game, all the thuggery has basically been stamped out but these days they've gone way too far the other way, however the so called 'keepers of the game' are emphatically trying to stamp out all aspects of the game we all love to a game that will sell to overseas markets & produce more overseas players (how about developing more players from non footy states in Australia first)

i remember when they brought in ''trial by video'' it was to pick up the king hits & the behind the play stuff, now they pick up anything & everything, accidents with both players going for the ball should be accepted as part of the game.................................if both Jakovich brothers were playing today i'm sure Allen would get 4-6 weeks for deliberate head high contact on his brother Glen when he kissed him many years ago

It's not SANFL, but does anyone catch Basil Zempilas on Saturday nights (I think). He does a run down of the games, and every week he highlights about 4-5 incidents that the MRP "must look at".

These incidents range from Buddy making accidental contact with a goal umpire, Ryan O'Keefe stumbling and pushing an opponent in the back, etc. It's just pathetic, and I really wish the media would leave these matters to the MRP and not feel it's their duty to decide what needs to be looked at. I really despise the AFL media.

All good points there from AH, Chambo and bayman to back up the thoughts that the game is being overly "managed" and that there may be a few innocent victims (players) out there. If we supporters are getting frustrated, I imagine players and clubs are in a similar boat. Is it time for the clubs to stand united and say enough is enough? Let's get back to some sanity, some justice for all, and stop tampering with the game, and in particular in this regard, charge someone with an offence and let them defend it without any repercussions of extra penalties. Do you suddenly become more guilty?

Mongrel Punter wrote:
After the completion of the minor round, we have seen 41
players reported either by umpires or the IRP (with 31 guilty), 8 fewer than all
of 2011 (30 guilty), and 10 more than all of 2010 (17 guilty), which was before
the IRP was introduced I believe. These do not include reports that were
withdrawn before reaching the tribunal.

Are players more illegally aggressive over the last 2 years
or has the judiciary of the league gone into insanity mode and created knee jerk
reactions with the video review, and the Incident Review Panel and Tribunal, with their questionable decisions, which were seen after the game at Elizabeth on Saturday?

My belief is the latter.

Check out who has been reported this year: James Allan, James
Bennett, Kriston Thompson, Nat Caruso, Ryan Williams, Jarrod Young, Ben Kane,
Ryan Ferguson, Adam Thomson, Angus Rowntree, Justin Hardy, Brady Dawe, Matt
Suckling, Lewis Johnston, James Meiklejohn, Byron Sumner amongst others. Hardly
a sniper or overly aggressive player in that lot, and in fact, they are ball
players and several are tagged in the game, often illegally without due
protection.

Which brings me to the Incident Review Panel who cite players
and generously offer games to miss without any recall to defend the actions. If
you DO choose to defend yourself, you risk further penalty, even if you believe
that you have nothing to defend. There is something seriously wrong there, and
the points system and carry-overs is a ridiculous way to determine a player’s
guilt or innocence and a corresponding penalty, just as you would expect from
the AFL, and unfortunately the cancerous action has eaten into our
game.

I've got to mention Chris Knights here as well - I could not believe it when he was suspended for a match. He seems so passive out on the field! Not soft, just the sort of player I would never think would be suspended, let alone reported.

Must be passive aggressive!

Furthermore, we heard back when this video tribunal system and then match review panel was invented, it was to keep the "Mums" of footy players happy that their lovely boys were not going to be molested by the thugs of the game. (Are there any thugs anymore?)

However, seemingly 90% of the things that get convicted, are nowhere close to thuggery. Mostly players who get done are contesting the ball or the man with the ball.

So this confirms the above theories that the game is being overly managed and the original premise for the video system (and 3 umpires too!) has been lost.

Think about this. There are 9 umpires out there and relatively evenly spread around the ground. If the video catches what they cannot see, then to the Optometrist with them all.

In the last 3 seasons, what percentage of reports by umpires (and not the MRP) have been filed by boundary or goal umpires? Probably could count them on one hand.

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:Furthermore, we heard back when this video tribunal system and then match review panel was invented, it was to keep the "Mums" of footy players happy that their lovely boys were not going to be molested by the thugs of the game. (Are there any thugs anymore?)

However, seemingly 90% of the things that get convicted, are nowhere close to thuggery. Mostly players who get done are contesting the ball or the man with the ball.

So this confirms the above theories that the game is being overly managed and the original premise for the video system (and 3 umpires too!) has been lost.

Think about this. There are 9 umpires out there and relatively evenly spread around the ground. If the video catches what they cannot see, then to the Optometrist with them all.

In the last 3 seasons, what percentage of reports by umpires (and not the MRP) have been filed by boundary or goal umpires? Probably could count them on one hand.

Excellent observation Chambo and inclined to agree with your last 2 paragraphs.

Well - any faith I had in the tribunal, and that wasn't much, disappeared with the news I just heard from a reliable source close to the matter.

1. A Centrals player spits blood over an opponent who reports it to the umpire, who then ignores it. He was probably shouting and the blood came out!
2. A Centrals player verbally abuses an umpire in just about the most foul way possible and again the umpires choose to ignore it.
3. A North player is given a 3 match ban which is reduced to 2 because he is provoked, but the alleged provoke does not warrant any real investigation as the charge of striking is dismissed and the player found not guilty, and the other matters are also ignored by the tribunal, who, interestingly, express disappointment in the outcome of the hearing.

So - there's one scapegoat who takes the rap and someone else who laughs at the investigation. Talk about a white-wash (and that is also an interesting choice of words).

Some players are umpired under different rules, MP.

I've mentioned this previously.

Pity North didn't study the extended video a bit more - there's a clear strike by a well-known Central player in it.

As for Clinch's scratch marks, I believe he's not the first player to have been a victim of that player and method this year.

Yes you did R&B. You are correct in all facets. I believe there are some Bloods players who have had similar problems with sharp grass that scratched them when they fell.

redandblack wrote:Some players are umpired under different rules, MP.

I've mentioned this previously.

Pity North didn't study the extended video a bit more - there's a clear strike by a well-known Central player in it.

As for Clinch's scratch marks, I believe he's not the first player to have been a victim of that player and method this year.

Definately not the first, and the same player was responsible. I just hope he clips his nails before tomorrows game.

Its just became more of a Joke after tonight Sansbury cleared to play Obst got one game taken off.

Are you really surprised Thiele? No video evidence so once again Centrals are able to talk their way out of it. As I pointed out earlier in the year their record is outstanding. They have earned a certain power over umpires and administrators in this comp that hopefully North can start to break down this week.

Makes Boyd even more stiff to miss out on the medal!

Sansbury and Obst decisions just makes even more of a mockery of the tribunal system.

I have no idea what they allegedly did but it is irrelevant.

I don't know whether Centrals are better at challenging these than other clubs, but seriously, why wouldn't every club challenge EVERY decision where a player is found guilty.

The chances of a reduction must be better than even.
Wherein the opposite occurs with the AFL. No chocolates for Brent Harvey.

I start to wonder what footy actually is anymore.
Is it netball in shorts with a bit basketball thrown in with 'presses', 'fat sides and weak sides'?

The game has been pushed so close to those sports in terms of physical contact, will it even resemble football in 5 years?

From the SANFL:

TRIBUNAL REPORTS

Central District’s James Gowans has been found guilty on a charge of umpire abuse and has been fined $500 by the Tribunal.

Central District’s Ryan Williams has accepted a one match penalty from the Incident Review Panel for a striking charge.