SA Footy

Good on the umpire for owning the mistake right from the start.

no_remorse28 wrote:Shane, referenced is the Port Districts scorer, who ranted and raved in Facebook about his former club, Ingle Farm and the umpires.

Where abouts on facebook? sounds like interesting reading.

Brodlach wrote:Good on the umpire for owning the mistake right from the start.

Yup, no one likes it when they make a mistake, good on him.

Trader wrote:Where abouts on facebook? sounds like interesting reading..

On his personal FB page.. enjoyable read Sunday lol.

Anyway, i've heard he officially lodged a report with ATCA about it as "cricket director", and they want the outright points + points stripped from Ingle Farm.

Seems pointless to me - they're the best part of 20pts behind 4th anyway.

Brodlach wrote:Good on the umpire for owning the mistake right from the start.

Agreed,

After reading that, the umpire should have known still, however it is on the Port Districts captain to know the rules, had this been questioned at the start of Port Districts innings, then this would not have happened.

When he offered the 4 overs to be bowled in good faith, strikes me as odd that Ingle farm didn't offer the full 4 overs. Port district could have only won the game, not taking any points away from Ingle farm's 10 points for first innings points They only stood to gain a few points from wickets, not lose any.

The Bedge wrote:

Trader wrote:Where abouts on facebook? sounds like interesting reading..

On his personal FB page.. enjoyable read Sunday lol.

Anyway, i've heard he officially lodged a report with ATCA about it as "cricket director", and they want the outright points + points stripped from Ingle Farm.

Seems pointless to me - they're the best part of 20pts behind 4th anyway.

Fair enough.

Will be interesting to see what comes out of it, if anything.

In the end, if they benefited instead of ingle farm here, he would be arguing it is the umpires decision. Can never seem to please the Port Districts scorer.

No report was made to try and claim any points for first innings or for the outright.
Ingle farm was too good in the first innings and unfortunately we didn’t chase the runs down in the second innings.
A match report was lodge of the game and what happened but no trying to claim any points or have anything over turned.
Michael the umpire is a good bloke and has been a good umpire. This time he got it wrong.

From my point of view and port districts point of view. An agreement was made between the shot callers from each club with all agreeing to play for maximum point. A verbal conversation and a handshake. Both teams agreed no matter the situation both teams would play for the outright until the very last bowl is bowl. Meaning if port districts were 4-15 we were still going to chase the runs down until last wicket is lost.
Port district opening batsman Charlie Rogers was absent with gastro. 1-0. Gihan out for a duck 2-0. Needing 173 of 25 overs and starting off at 2-0 was not a great start and with barber off spinner opening up attempting to get through there overs fast it was very unlikely we would chase down the total. Shaminda went bang bang bang on his way to a very fast 50 and with love going ok port districts were a small chance. Drinks break come and what followed was a very very slow over rate.
David hayzer was called after confirmation that stumps were going to be called at 6.03. 3 min time delay was the 3 minutes added on. David reply was browny it’s a minimum 25 overs which have to be bowled any other issues please call him back. . The by-laws states 7pm is the cut off. A drink was ran out to our batsman and they were told to allow for 25 overs on our run chase. Half way through the last over 21st over shaminda eranga went to the boundary to discuss the rules at the conclusion of the over. The score was 4-151 off 21 overs which we believed left us needed 22 off 24 balls the previous 3 overs went for 37 runs. Michael was made aware of the ruling and a phone call was made to david hayzer. Things were very heated between myself and most of Ingle farm at this stage. Michael the umpire was very apologetic and as he tried to fix things for both teams he offered shaminda 2 overs to bat which shaminda refused as he wanted the bylaws followed. Michael then approached Ingle farm captain and asked if he would bowl 3 overs which he refused. Unfortunately stumps were then called and the game was off leaving us 22 runs short of an unlikely reverse outright and 5 much needed points and some I’ll feelings against the Ingle farm captain for going against the agreement and handshake.

Ingle farm deserve the first innings points. Unfortunately we didn’t get the outright. Michael has continued to apologise which is no issues poor mistake and unfortunately and verbal and hand shake means very little if anything.

I did put in a full match report of player’s behaviour including one of our own players along with my poor behaviour at the conclusion of the game I’m happy to cop what ever come my way.

Browny, why did you need to call Heyzer? Surely you guys all knew the bylaws.

By the way, aren't 'handshake agreements' prohibited?

Happy Saturday Afternoon
Flicking through play cricket and tune into the para hills/grange match and within seconds a shout for lbw turns into utter disgrace… Sayers to Wordsworth which ends up being caught in the book by the look of things. Umpire unsure, so clearly went and discussed with other umpire. Only to be disgracefully abused by the skipper sayers, threatening a walk off if batter not given out. Batter then given out and looks like discussions between PH bats and umpire.
May be the right decision but looking at the footage and clearly being able to hear on frogbox I’d say Grange might be missing their skipper in the finals. How do they rate dissent, abuse and intimidation these days…….

Whatsfordinner wrote:Happy Saturday Afternoon
Flicking through play cricket and tune into the para hills/grange match and within seconds a shout for lbw turns into utter disgrace… Sayers to Wordsworth which ends up being caught in the book by the look of things. Umpire unsure, so clearly went and discussed with other umpire. Only to be disgracefully abused by the skipper sayers, threatening a walk off if batter not given out. Batter then given out and looks like discussions between PH bats and umpire.
May be the right decision but looking at the footage and clearly being able to hear on frogbox I’d say Grange might be missing their skipper in the finals. How do they rate dissent, abuse and intimidation these days…….

Saw the same footage, absolutely disgraceful by Sayers brothers. Aaron would get 6 games in SACA Premier cricket. Should not be playing finals if they are fair dinkum. And got their way in the end, total joke

It was pretty poor today, apparently something similar earlier this year vs Port Districts happened to involving Aaron Sayers. The justification at the break that it's just a part of cricket was surprising, as if their is nothing wrong with what took place.

Any way, with the ATCA compliance officer in attendance it will be interesting to see how it proceeds. Our focus moves to Trinity next week.

no_remorse28 wrote:It was pretty poor today, apparently something similar earlier this year vs Port Districts happened to involving Aaron Sayers. The justification at the break that it's just a part of cricket was surprising, as if their is nothing wrong with what took place.

Any way, with the ATCA compliance officer in attendance it will be interesting to see how it proceeds. Our focus moves to Trinity next week.

Just watched the footage. Tbh he is out and even a bloke on frog box from PH I’d assume can be heard saying he has hit it. Either way poor behaviour on Aaron’s side and should be given games.

Next week seems to be a battle for relegation with Marion losing. Still 3 teams could go down

Didn’t say he wasn’t out haha..
but what a disgraceful way to act. This is the very reason leagues are short of umpires and players act the way they do. Yes it could’ve been a big moment in the game, but to walk at the umpire swearing and yelling the way he was is extremely poor. The league need to make a statement otherwise it’ll keep happening.

If Heyzer/ATCA are serious about player behaviour Aaron isn’t playing til round 3 next season and Grange are getting points taken away from them. It’s why clubs should have Frigbox so that people can see the carry on from teams each week. Fair play to Wordsworth he looked like he handled a situation like that fairly well - could’ve been alot worse had he decided to carry on.

Offence 2.1 - show serious dissent at umpires decision
Offence 2.6 - offensive language towards an official
Offence 3.1 - intimidate an umpire.

Recommended penalties are: 2-3 two day games for each of 2.1 and 2.6, and 3-5 two day games for 3.1
Guilty, Guilty and Guilty for mine.
7-11 rounds total.

See you in Feb 2025 Arron.

Trader wrote:Offence 2.1 - show serious dissent at umpires decision
Offence 2.6 - offensive language towards an official
Offence 3.1 - intimidate an umpire.

Recommended penalties are: 2-3 two day games for each of 2.1 and 2.6, and 3-5 two day games for 3.1
Guilty, Guilty and Guilty for mine.
7-11 rounds total.

See you in Feb 2025 Arron.

Will be a test for Heyzer, agree has to be massive penalty. Hopefully the umps reported him to start with

Eagles2014 wrote:

Trader wrote:Offence 2.1 - show serious dissent at umpires decision
Offence 2.6 - offensive language towards an official
Offence 3.1 - intimidate an umpire.

Recommended penalties are: 2-3 two day games for each of 2.1 and 2.6, and 3-5 two day games for 3.1
Guilty, Guilty and Guilty for mine.
7-11 rounds total.

See you in Feb 2025 Arron.

Will be a test for Heyzer, agree has to be massive penalty. Hopefully the umps reported him to start with

That's why, if Associations trust, back and support their umpires they should be able to use and implement Law 42. Intimidating an umpire is a level 3 so the player would have an immediate holiday for 10 overs on the side lines let alone penalty runs and then any suspensions to be applied to future games.

Out of interest who is the ATCA compliance officer?

no_remorse28 wrote:It was pretty poor today, apparently something similar earlier this year vs Port Districts happened to involving Aaron Sayers. The justification at the break that it's just a part of cricket was surprising, as if there is nothing wrong with what took place.

Any way, with the ATCA compliance officer in attendance it will be interesting to see how it proceeds. Our focus moves to Trinity next week.

Out of interest who is the ATCA compliance officer?

no_remorse28 wrote:It was pretty poor today, apparently something similar earlier this year vs Port Districts happened to involving Aaron Sayers. The justification at the break that it's just a part of cricket was surprising, as if there is nothing wrong with what took place.

Any way, with the ATCA compliance officer in attendance it will be interesting to see how it proceeds. Our focus moves to Trinity next week.

Out of interest who is the ATCA compliance officer?

no_remorse28 wrote:It was pretty poor today, apparently something similar earlier this year vs Port Districts happened to involving Aaron Sayers. The justification at the break that it's just a part of cricket was surprising, as if there is nothing wrong with what took place.

Any way, with the ATCA compliance officer in attendance it will be interesting to see how it proceeds. Our focus moves to Trinity next week.