SA Footy

Do people actually think the league is fair https://www.facebook.com/callum.hay3/po ... 4621365106

From the vision he posted, it seems he was the main instigator that turned a football incident (a tackle) into a melee. During the melee he then made forceful contact with an umpire and got a 15 week suspension.
It was a grand final, where suspensions are doubled, so effectively he got 7-8 for inciting a melee and making forceful contact with an umpire.
Perhaps a little harsh, but not miles over the top for mine.

The rules are fairly clear that 12 games plus gets you de-registered. I have no issues with the league holding that line.

If anything, the player in question should have tried to appeal the suspension at the time, not tried to get special dispensation to be allowed to play 3 years later.

The melee actually started from a rocs player sling tackling a hawks player and knocking him out. Is callum in the wrong for standing up for one of his best mates? He didnt go in fists flying, he didnt even hurt the opposing player.

Also he got 7 weeks for the sling tackle, how many did the rocs player get?

The umpire part is hard but for anyone who has played footy and has been in a melee would know that you are wary of whats coming from behind or the sides as anyone could run in. I believe hes thought the ump was a rocs player (dont understand why they wore that colour when rocs are playing) because the ump was streaming in his direction to send the other hawks bloke off that was actually throwing punches. Im all for umpire protection but 2-3 games would have been more than enough.

I also believe the hawks did everything in their power to get callum off at the time but to no avail. Surely 3 years out of the league and playing footy in another league with 0 reports or any incidents, and also representing our state on numerous occasions would be enough to be given a chance to play footy with the club he wants and with the club his family has been around for decades.

What was the breakdown of charges laid?

LaughingKookaburra wrote:What was the breakdown of charges laid?

6 for the sling tackle
9 for contact with an umpire

It was pretty negligent to push the umpire. He is looking right at him and from what I can see he was blowing his whistle as he is running in so saying he was confused as a Rocs player doesn't really mount a strong argument. I wasn't there but the footage to me shows a bloke who lost his cool after sticking up for his mate. His actions incited a far bigger problem though and he pushed an umpire. You would get at least 10-12 weeks for doing that in the AFL. You just can't touch umpires and him getting fired up caused the umpires to be so involved and close to the issues arising.

It's not the worst thing I have seen on a footy field but he pushed an umpire and him blowing up was the reason why the umpire was there. May see unfair but I can see why he has been given more than 12 weeks.

Probably need to know the full story here as the injured team mate also had support staff around him so it looks as if there was a delay between the initial incident and then the said mellee which then caused the chaos that erupted.

Got 9 weeks for that but 6 for the melee?

I think the main point is why not let the bloke back on a bond. No reports before or after this, has played zone and state country footy. Doesn't deserve a life ban for that.

I'm not questioning the blokes integrity mate. However it's a scenario that did play out. From my understanding he seems a good bloke.

How long was the gap between the incident that injured his team mate and this fight starting? Because if there is a gap then what is the need to start a fight? It's not like everyone come running for that bloke straight away! If there was a gap I can see why he was given the 12 plus weeks. Again I am not questioning the blokes integrity.

Why impose life bans if you can play again after 3 years. what has he showed to say he should be allowed to play in the league again. Play good footy and not getting suspended? Big deal, he should do that anyway.

Given the events of last year I can't see the league extending many favours for people done for contact with umpires (and rightly so)

A life ban is a life ban.
Don't touch umpires,
every player knows the rules.
How are we going to get young kids into umpiring if tribunals are weak on this.

After watching the footage it's hard to feel sorry for him

Trader wrote:From the vision he posted, it seems he was the main instigator that turned a football incident (a tackle) into a melee. During the melee he then made forceful contact with an umpire and got a 15 week suspension.
It was a grand final, where suspensions are doubled, so effectively he got 7-8 for inciting a melee and making forceful contact with an umpire.
Perhaps a little harsh, but not miles over the top for mine.

The rules are fairly clear that 12 games plus gets you de-registered. I have no issues with the league holding that line.

If anything, the player in question should have tried to appeal the suspension at the time, not tried to get special dispensation to be allowed to play 3 years later.

This is not correct I dont think. He got 6 weeks for the tackle and 9 for the umpire contact.

I agree overall though, a 7-8 week suspension for that is fair. The guy he was ragdolling wasn't fighting back, clearly wanted no part of it, yet he very dangerously slung him to the ground incredibly forcibly - all this when it was ages after any incident.

Flying the flag doesn't mean smashing someone into the ground.

Combine that with obviously shoving an umpire and yeah, 8 weeks is about right, The league decided to go all guns blazing and whacked him harder. Life ban probably overly harsh. Would have him in the last chance saloon.

Out of curiosity why didn't he appeal it at the time?

I'm with you on the 15 weeks being a bit tough.

I think deregistration and life bans are over the top in general - no second chances, no opportunity for rehabilitation etc.. even the criminal justice system has more leniency and empathy.

Ingle Farm had a kid cop 12 games the other year at 21yo, first ever offence, never even sent off prior and one stuff up has stuffed his whole football "life" forever.

By all means hand out hefty suspensions and penalties, but life bans are just stupid.

Zartan wrote:I think deregistration and life bans are over the top in general - no second chances, no opportunity for rehabilitation etc.. even the criminal justice system has more leniency and empathy.

Ingle Farm had a kid cop 12 games the other year at 21yo, first ever offence, never even sent off prior and one stuff up has stuffed his whole football "life" forever.

By all means hand out hefty suspensions and penalties, but life bans are just stupid.

Would you let Adam Rumbleow back in the League?

Surely there's a line somewhere where they're appropriate

jo172 wrote:Would you let Adam Rumbleow back in the League?

Surely there's a line somewhere where they're appropriate

Well looking at his age anyway, giving the bloke a really hefty penalty would likely force him into retirement anyway, and then you'd think the footy club would internally deal with the matter as well - so hard to see him playing again.

Also think there is a difference between headbutting an umpire and shoving one like Hay did in the video.

People more often than not deserve a second chance. He's been playing for three years in another league with a clean record, so let him play D1 under a good behaviour bond.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

The punishment no way fits the crime. I'd like to see the lead up!

tigerpie wrote:The punishment no way fits the crime. I'd like to see the lead up!

Didn't this happen in the GF replay? Salisbury North thought they would assert their 'toughness' it didn't work....