SA Footy

What’s done is done now, but there has to be a penalty for such a liberty taken in a final.
Start next season minus 2 points seems about right.
Watch the SANFL squirm and quiver like cowards though

Wedgie wrote:

JK wrote:Wedgie be having a huge birthday, might be some entertaining posts tonight

I'm happy but ******* exhausted. I gave up when the Eagles were more than 7 goals up.
In absolute shock.
I hugged strangers, I cried, I laughed, I jumped up and down, I cheered, I sang. I'm ******.
Got my cock out a few times today.
Best birthday ever.

Plenty of handshakes from the Grog squad when you do that heh...... Ah yeah...

The longer this goes on the more likely it seems there's going to be an interesting outcome.

Booney wrote:The longer this goes on the more likely it seems there's going to be an interesting outcome.

I can see them awarding the win to the Hybrids.

I'd go legal if it were contributed to by officials. Your team may never see another gf opportunity again. Also what if the infringing team didn't score but the extra player contributes to the opposition not scoring. Five minutes is a long time in a game.

Did the 4th umpire know about the 19th man?

SANFL currently meeting.
Which club has the bigger lawyers and deepest pockets?

I hope its overturned as a neutral SANFL fan .

If not North have to cop a big fine for bringing the game into distribute IMO, at least $50K. I'd have suggested $10-$20K normally but being a final it has to be very hefty if they are allowed to go through.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Did the 4th umpire know about the 19th man?

Yes.......their response was "North will get fined"

Half Back Flanker wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Did the 4th umpire know about the 19th man?

Yes.......their response was "North will get fined"

That is staggering.
4th umpire will be looking for a new job.

When you look at the legalities, I'm not sure they could overturn it.

1) The rule specifically states that the captain or acting captain must alert the on-field field umpire and request the count - this didn't happen. The boundary rider alerting the interchange steward or the 4th umpire isn't an official request for a head count, which is why nothing would've been done. SO calling for the 4th umpires head is stupid

Biggles and Roo carrying on this morning about how it isn't the captains problem to be doing this stuff. Fairly clueless remarks from both, considering the amount of games they've played between them.

2) Umpires signed off on the card afterwards

No point in crying about it after the fact if you didn't follow the correct procedure to have the infringement rectified in the first place.

If they do overturn it, the Roosers will probably cop a massive fine from the SANFL to make up for the tickets that no-one will now buy

Booney wrote:The longer this goes on the more likely it seems there's going to be an interesting outcome.

The cocks will erupt if there is!

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:

Half Back Flanker wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Did the 4th umpire know about the 19th man?

Yes.......their response was "North will get fined"

That is staggering.
4th umpire will be looking for a new job.

Not so staggering given the quality of glass-jawed prima donna umpires we have in this state. And it starts at the top. Incompetence personified.

Can we do a poll please?

Footy Chick wrote:When you look at the legalities, I'm not sure they could overturn it.

1) The rule specifically states that the captain or acting captain must alert the on-field field umpire and request the count - this didn't happen. The boundary rider alerting the interchange steward or the 4th umpire isn't an official request for a head count, which is why nothing would've been done. SO calling for the 4th umpires head is stupid

Biggles and Roo carrying on this morning about how it isn't the captains problem to be doing this stuff. Fairly clueless remarks from both, considering the amount of games they've played between them.

Yes but as some astute poster indicated before, rule 5.5.1 indicates that "the" field umpire is requested to count the players. The rules may define "the" field umpire as the senior umpire, however if they do not then there could be an argument mounted that the rules are outdated. What cant be argued is that:

There are meant to be 18 players on the field, and the team who has more has a distinct advantage.

Norf had the advantage which was realised for a full 5 minutes (17% of a quarter) at which point North had the play advantage and converted this on the score board.

Godden has stated that they could not find how North were finding the loose player

The Eagles realised that there was an extra player and bought it to the attention of the 4th umpire.

The captain did not make the request for a count, hence could not invoke the count procedure

Of the above, if the rules are interpreted as being outdated or lacking, the least of concern is the captain asking for a count.

Footy Chick wrote:2) Umpires signed off on the card afterwards

No point in crying about it after the fact if you didn't follow the correct procedure to have the infringement rectified in the first place.

If they do overturn it, the Rooster will probably cop a massive fine from the SANFL to make up for the tickets that no-one will now buy

I agree, the result should stand but the fact is Norf have cheated, whether it was on purpose or inadvertent, they have cheated. Sure the Eagles had a big lead an blew it, but they fought back and deserved to win it because the 8 points that North scored they did with an unfair advantage.

Eagles training this arvo and their CEO has said the club is exploring legal avenues

knowledge wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:

Half Back Flanker wrote:

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:Did the 4th umpire know about the 19th man?

Yes.......their response was "North will get fined"

That is staggering.
4th umpire will be looking for a new job.

Not so staggering given the quality of glass-jawed prima donna umpires we have in this state. And it starts at the top. Incompetence personified.

In near on 40 years, I can’t recall the standard of SANFL umpiring being so deplorable.

Jim05 wrote:Eagles training this arvo and their CEO has said the club is exploring legal avenues

Meanwhile, Norwood are just sitting back laughing.

Spargo wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Eagles training this arvo and their CEO has said the club is exploring legal avenues

Meanwhile, Norwood are just sitting back laughing.

I wouldn’t say laughing. I’m sure at training this week we would like to know our opponent to prepare for them

I can't understand how the SANFL is being labelled as the chief villain. The main party at fault is Norf, it is their responsibility to have the correct number of players on the field. The Eagles should have looked at the rule book and demanded the count, but the SANFL is the last of the 3 parties (or 4 if you want to include the umpires as separate) to be held responsible.