human_torpedo wrote:Before I get howled down by the masses - I agree the SANFL have been spineless through out this whole ordeal since the Reserves sides came in and I don't like that they are in..
However, surely logic prevails in this situation.. CEY has played 2 AFL games all year, and 18 SANFL games. People cant feel hard done by that he is playing this week. He has played all year, he was a suspension replacement and would have been dropped this week if the AFL hadn't stupidly scheduled a bye after round 23 and we had AFL finals to watch this weekend.. I know its the rules that you are ineligible if you played AFL in the last round, but I think CEY qualifies for the extenuating circumstances in this case.
Seedsman, Sloane and Smith would be different cases as they all played majority of AFL, Seedsman only having played a couple of SANFL games. I don't think they should play this week
But what are these 'extenuating circumstances'? There are a set of rules in place, to ensure the Crows don't stack sides in finals, which the Crows are (presumably) aware of. They picked CEY in full knowledge of the consequences of doing so - this includes the consequences for both of their teams. He's replacing a suspended player? That's not good enough grounds for overturning his ineligibility. That's the Crows own fault (by extension), because Rory Sloane didn't have to clobber Ebert in the Showdown and get rubbed out for a week. Sloane keeps his fist to himself, he plays against the Eagles, and CEY stays in the twos and qualifies under the rules. By trying to overturn something that was entirely within their control the Crows want their apricot slice and to eat it too.
The rules are there for a reason. Unless the permit is a rubber stamp upon request, the onus is on the Crows to demonstrate what the extenuating circumstances are to justify eligibility. We're yet to know what these circumstances are.
The other issue here is not just this 'get into the SANFL finals free card' for ineligible players, but the fact that under the rules (as I understand it) Sloane, Seedsman, and Smith have qualified simply because they didn't play last week. The fact they've played the majority of games at AFL levels this year (as HT pointed out) suggests they should also be ineligible, not merely considered unavailable at the coach's discretion. In all honesty, I'm thankful Younie hasn't opted to pick these players when he is full within his rights to do so.