ATCA

[Bluedemon]

A2 Semi-Finals stay as they are
Reynella v Walkerville
Unley v SPOC

Flinders Parks appeal not successful

[tigerpie]

Waste of time and energy.
Cop your whack and move on.

[back89]

Does everyone know Happen with Adelaide Uni vs Payneham B2 Semi Final
No Play on Saturday then only 2.3 overs yesterday before it was call off Payneham Facebook story had B grade call off Results Pending

SInce with call off game Adelaide Uni go though as the top side Maybe Payneham are going to protest it over the wicket or something like that?

[JimShoes]

Hearing from someone that may have heard from someone else - apparently a player got injured in the outfield that was still wet.
Cant confirm who got injured for which team but must have been serious enough to call the game.

[Brodlach]

Just been discussing this with a Payneham player, Saturday they turned up and the sprinklers were on so they couldn’t play. Turned up Sunday and there was a wet spot but the higher powers said to play and someone was injured in that wet spot in the third over.

[back89]

Just been discussing this with a Payneham player, Saturday they turned up and the sprinklers were on so they couldn’t play. Turned up Sunday and there was a wet spot but the higher powers said to play and someone was injured in that wet spot in the third over.

Well then i wonder who will go though to the grand final then.

B3 Semi Final Old Concordians vs Golden Grove was also one day game yesurday after no play on Saturday i know Thursday with the rain would not have help too etc

[Brodlach]

Just been discussing this with a Payneham player, Saturday they turned up and the sprinklers were on so they couldn’t play. Turned up Sunday and there was a wet spot but the higher powers said to play and someone was injured in that wet spot in the third over.

Well then i wonder who will go though to the grand final then.

B3 Semi Final Old Concordians vs Golden Grove was also one day game yesurday after no play on Saturday i know Thursday with the rain would not have help too etc

Payneham as they were not the home team, Adelaide Uni were.

[Jimmy_041]

Seems to be a growing unwillingness from certain clubs to accept the umpire's decision.

Someone reported you (umpire, opposition, spectator, etc).
A review of written submissions assesses the facts and if guilty, you got offered a penalty, you didn't accept.
You then have a face to face hearing, and if guilty you get handed a penalty, you once again didn't accept.
You then take it to a tribunal.

3 different people have assessed that your behaviour isn't what it should be, and you've failed to accept the penalty time and time again.

Tribunals don't come together overnight, as they are so rare, it is not like there are people on standby ready to go. They need to be different to the people that undertook the written, and the face-to-face phases, which doesn't leave many volunteers available to undertake the process.

The problem is club's unwillingness to accept the result of their player's misbehaviour.

If anything, I'd be in favour of ATCA moving to cut out the tribunal option. You get an offer of a penalty based on written submissions, if you don't accept it, you go to a face to face hearing. That's it. That's your 'appeal' so to speak. The fact ATCA allows a third round is potentially too generous.

Problem is you need to have to (appear to) apply "natural justice" or "procedural fairness" or the club / player will just go to Court:

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/truecrim ... 6605f6e8ac

[Catter4lyfe]

The policy works up until the last couple rounds where it has a significant impact on other clubs that weren't involved etc.

Where the policy falls over is to my knowledge there is no adequate consequence for the appeal not getting up, clubs who take it to that level should incur a significant financial fine in the event the decision is not reversed as FP had nothing to lose by appealing and everything to gain.

[tigerpie]

Seems to be a growing unwillingness from certain clubs to accept the umpire's decision.

Someone reported you (umpire, opposition, spectator, etc).
A review of written submissions assesses the facts and if guilty, you got offered a penalty, you didn't accept.
You then have a face to face hearing, and if guilty you get handed a penalty, you once again didn't accept.
You then take it to a tribunal.

3 different people have assessed that your behaviour isn't what it should be, and you've failed to accept the penalty time and time again.

Tribunals don't come together overnight, as they are so rare, it is not like there are people on standby ready to go. They need to be different to the people that undertook the written, and the face-to-face phases, which doesn't leave many volunteers available to undertake the process.

The problem is club's unwillingness to accept the result of their player's misbehaviour.

If anything, I'd be in favour of ATCA moving to cut out the tribunal option. You get an offer of a penalty based on written submissions, if you don't accept it, you go to a face to face hearing. That's it. That's your 'appeal' so to speak. The fact ATCA allows a third round is potentially too generous.

Problem is you need to have to (appear to) apply "natural justice" or "procedural fairness" or the club / player will just go to Court:

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/truecrim ... 6605f6e8ac

It's community cricket. Going to court over community cricket that's insane.
Unless the player stands to lose thousands over it?

[JimShoes]

Just been discussing this with a Payneham player, Saturday they turned up and the sprinklers were on so they couldn’t play. Turned up Sunday and there was a wet spot but the higher powers said to play and someone was injured in that wet spot in the third over.

Well then i wonder who will go though to the grand final then.

B3 Semi Final Old Concordians vs Golden Grove was also one day game yesurday after no play on Saturday i know Thursday with the rain would not have help too etc

Heard Concordia didn't prepare a pitch and that's why it ended up a one-dayer

[Senor Moto Gadili]

Just been discussing this with a Payneham player, Saturday they turned up and the sprinklers were on so they couldn’t play. Turned up Sunday and there was a wet spot but the higher powers said to play and someone was injured in that wet spot in the third over.

Well then i wonder who will go though to the grand final then.

B3 Semi Final Old Concordians vs Golden Grove was also one day game yesurday after no play on Saturday i know Thursday with the rain would not have help too etc

Payneham as they were not the home team, Adelaide Uni were.

Either way I can see the result being contested which means ATCA should have it sorted out by about 8.30pm this Friday.

[Jimmy_041]

Seems to be a growing unwillingness from certain clubs to accept the umpire's decision.

Someone reported you (umpire, opposition, spectator, etc).
A review of written submissions assesses the facts and if guilty, you got offered a penalty, you didn't accept.
You then have a face to face hearing, and if guilty you get handed a penalty, you once again didn't accept.
You then take it to a tribunal.

3 different people have assessed that your behaviour isn't what it should be, and you've failed to accept the penalty time and time again.

Tribunals don't come together overnight, as they are so rare, it is not like there are people on standby ready to go. They need to be different to the people that undertook the written, and the face-to-face phases, which doesn't leave many volunteers available to undertake the process.

The problem is club's unwillingness to accept the result of their player's misbehaviour.

If anything, I'd be in favour of ATCA moving to cut out the tribunal option. You get an offer of a penalty based on written submissions, if you don't accept it, you go to a face to face hearing. That's it. That's your 'appeal' so to speak. The fact ATCA allows a third round is potentially too generous.

Problem is you need to have to (appear to) apply "natural justice" or "procedural fairness" or the club / player will just go to Court:

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/truecrim ... 6605f6e8ac

It's community cricket. Going to court over community cricket that's insane.
Unless the player stands to lose thousands over it?

Broadview went for it

Unrelated:
The one good thing about the legal system is legal costs
If you roll the dice; even if you win you may still end up with significant legal fees
There should always be a potential cost of playing the game and there's never a sure thing when you gamble

[back89]

Just been discussing this with a Payneham player, Saturday they turned up and the sprinklers were on so they couldn’t play. Turned up Sunday and there was a wet spot but the higher powers said to play and someone was injured in that wet spot in the third over.

Well then i wonder who will go though to the grand final then.

B3 Semi Final Old Concordians vs Golden Grove was also one day game yesurday after no play on Saturday i know Thursday with the rain would not have help too etc

Payneham as they were not the home team, Adelaide Uni were.

Either way I can see the result being contested which means ATCA should have it sorted out by about 8.30pm this Friday.

I can see the B3 game being Contested too

[Sonofbrowny25]

what was the Heccies pitch doing on the weekend. reverse outright to go through!

unpopular opinion maybe but outright should be completely off the card in finals unless its a tied first innings.

[Lightning McQueen]

Either way I can see the result being contested which means ATCA should have it sorted out by about 8.30pm this Friday.

Wrapping it up early you think?

[Trader]

Seems to be a growing unwillingness from certain clubs to accept the umpire's decision.

Someone reported you (umpire, opposition, spectator, etc).
A review of written submissions assesses the facts and if guilty, you got offered a penalty, you didn't accept.
You then have a face to face hearing, and if guilty you get handed a penalty, you once again didn't accept.
You then take it to a tribunal.

3 different people have assessed that your behaviour isn't what it should be, and you've failed to accept the penalty time and time again.

Tribunals don't come together overnight, as they are so rare, it is not like there are people on standby ready to go. They need to be different to the people that undertook the written, and the face-to-face phases, which doesn't leave many volunteers available to undertake the process.

The problem is club's unwillingness to accept the result of their player's misbehaviour.

If anything, I'd be in favour of ATCA moving to cut out the tribunal option. You get an offer of a penalty based on written submissions, if you don't accept it, you go to a face to face hearing. That's it. That's your 'appeal' so to speak. The fact ATCA allows a third round is potentially too generous.

Problem is you need to have to (appear to) apply "natural justice" or "procedural fairness" or the club / player will just go to Court:

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/truecrim ... 6605f6e8ac

Yeah, I get we can't have no appeals, but to effectively have 2 is overkill imo.

Agree with the other other commentors that there needs to be a penalty for challenging and losing.
Used to be a $100 bond from memory.
Not sure if that still exists or not.

[Trader]

Either way I can see the result being contested which means ATCA should have it sorted out by about 8.30pm this Friday.

Wrapping it up early you think?

Apparently the Flinders Park tribunal went for over 5 hours.

Not sure how many times you can confirm the bowler was swearing his head off at anyone within 200 feet of him.

[Trader]

what was the Heccies pitch doing on the weekend. reverse outright to go through!

unpopular opinion maybe but outright should be completely off the card in finals unless its a tied first innings.

Modbury after winning on first innings went into their shells and tried to bat out a draw.
One bloke faced over 100 balls for less than 10 runs.

Sure enough, left a small total to chase and nothing to lose going after it, which Heccies did and got there easily.

[Lightning McQueen]

what was the Heccies pitch doing on the weekend. reverse outright to go through!

unpopular opinion maybe but outright should be completely off the card in finals unless its a tied first innings.

I couldn't agree with you less there young fella, I have played in some ripper finals that went down to the 4th innings, high pressure stuff made more intense once other games finish and they all start rocking up for the cricket fix.

Losing 5/2 and to still win is a fair achievement.