Southern Football League

[Panther32]

Swooper - I've been told that weetra is at Pt Districts while the Pt Magpies desperately try to reignite his interest in the game

I was informed that Port had no problems clearing him to Reynella, but the SANFL wouldn't clear him to play at Reynella. Would be disappointed if they then cleared him to Port Districts.

[PANTHER 1136]

At porties we have experianced the extra player moment a couple times so we sought out the umpires

My understanding of the extra man rule is this.
Only one of the captians on the day can call for a count (Porties v Flaggies 4th Q a couple few years back this happened) ump calls time both teams line up umps do a count if a team offends the score is wiped.

To this day the captian regrets doing it and is probably his lowest moment in football
(I think)
After that day we are lead to believe the ruling changed:

the team officials note it down (time score) and the umps detirmine at the next break if the 19th player has impacted the game then i think its up to the umps what the do

[The Lova]

sounds to me like the opinion of a bloke that sat back and watched his team get flogged by 20 goals and would rather it be 10.

You're right Lova, we should all sit back and concede Morphies never do anything wrong..

How dare facts tarnish an argument!

No doubt MV were the superior side, whether 10 or 20 goals (or 30) it was a comprehensive win. Dazza would know a lot more than your good self about anything from a steward/team manager perspective, I'd stake large coin on this.


PS Hows Liam Green going? Far too good at his age to be kicking around the SFL...

Maybe you and Dazza should get a room.
Id suggest the month of september, you blokes should have nothing on then.

[Bag The Points]

Reckon I'm getting sick of this AFL ad smashing me in the face everytime I click on something at the moment. Could end up curing me of my addiction to footynet.

[Axle Rose]

At porties we have experianced the extra player moment a couple times so we sought out the umpires

My understanding of the extra man rule is this.
Only one of the captians on the day can call for a count (Porties v Flaggies 4th Q a couple few years back this happened) ump calls time both teams line up umps do a count if a team offends the score is wiped.

To this day the captian regrets doing it and is probably his lowest moment in football
(I think)
After that day we are lead to believe the ruling changed:

the team officials note it down (time score) and the umps detirmine at the next break if the 19th player has impacted the game then i think its up to the umps what the do

If that rule is the case, then i can only assume that the score will be reinstated as there was no play whatsoever with the extra player on the field. Sounds like the umpires did it correctly on the day (except for not displaying the card correctly), the problem is with whoever decided to wipe the score after the event. I agree that it would be quite embarrassing for the opposing captain to ask for a count, so wouldnt the best thing to do be inform the interchange stewards (who were both unaware of the card) that there has been a card and to take the player off with minimum fuss. All this has done is create a huge problem for what is likely to end up as just a free kick and a 50m penalty.

[onka man]

sounds to me like the opinion of a bloke that sat back and watched his team get flogged by 20 goals and would rather it be 10.

You're right Lova, we should all sit back and concede Morphies never do anything wrong..

How dare facts tarnish an argument!

No doubt MV were the superior side, whether 10 or 20 goals (or 30) it was a comprehensive win. Dazza would know a lot more than your good self about anything from a steward/team manager perspective, I'd stake large coin on this.



PS Hows Liam Green going? Far too good at his age to be kicking around the SFL...

Is Liam Green, Tyler Green's brother?

No relation whatsoever......

[MatteeG]

Maybe you and Dazza should get a room.
Id suggest the month of september, you blokes should have nothing on then.

Would it be called a "Lova in"?

[t express]

Swooper - I've been told that weetra is at Pt Districts while the Pt Magpies desperately try to reignite his interest in the game

I was informed that Port had no problems clearing him to Reynella, but the SANFL wouldn't clear him to play at Reynella. Would be disappointed if they then cleared him to Port Districts.

correct SANFL would not clear Issac Weetra to reynella,have to wait and see about 2010, Lets get down to the serious stuff finals start this week really, time to tell who is the real thing for 09,cant wait to see some results and to watch some good footy over the next 7 weeks

[shoe boy]

And the winners.

Brighton V M/Vale. Morphies for me and back to top of the ladder.

C/Beach V M/Parks. M/Parks are pulling out all guns including Grima Parks for me.

Cove V Flaggies. Cove

E/Town V Lonsdale. Townies to keep the pressure in the top 4 and by years end will be close.

H/Valley V Pt Noarlunga. Valley in a cracker of a game.

Noarlunga V Marion. Shoes need this too much and will get up.

Reynella V Hackham. Txpress to realise that finals dont start this week for the wineys.

Aldinga (bye) expect to see and catch up with the lads.

[Goodluck]

Very big week for some teams, great weekend of footy coming up.

Brighton V Morphettvale
Happy Valley V port Noarlunga
Noarlunga V Marion
Christies V Morphettville

Four big games that could go either way, my tips are:
Morphettvale
Port Noarlunga
Noarlunga
Morphettville

[Panther32]

Its actually the lawn shark... haha

Just worked out who you are a2m...thanks to a facebook post!

[a2m]

Its actually the lawn shark... haha

Just worked out who you are a2m...thanks to a facebook post!

The question is panther, did you join and will u be getting ur lawn mowed???

[Dazza44]

Some comments:
1. The umpires have acted totally in accordance with the instructions issued to them by the Umpires panel (or the SFL) - I got this from an SFL umpire who was not one of the ones officiating. That is, that in any case of a "count", the scores are to be noted at that time and the incident reported to the Board for action. I don't actually agree with this by the way - I think that the scores should be immediately cancelled, at least that way everyone knows where they stand ! I think that the actual rules are quite clear that a team found to have to many players on the field loses their score to thet point in the match, it's just that the AFL has gone soft on this with their new rules - but we don't play by AFL rules, we play by SFL rules which follow the SANFL.
2. I don't agree that the ump concerned erred in not indicating the yellow card correctly, he clearly showed it (I could see from the other end of the ground) and then walked half-way to the interchange bench following the player before he went back to deal with the melee that was re-erupting.
3. As a long-time Team Manager and Interchange Steward, there is no doubt in my mind that the fault was totally in the court of the Morphies officials. Everyone should know that if there is any doubt whether there is a send-off you confirm it with either the players or the umps before you send a player on. .. and in this case there should have been no doubt that there may have been a send-off. To say that they thought it was just a player running off for "self-discipline " after a 50m penalty is crap - that player had already well and truly run off after giving 2x50m before the melee even happened !!
[/quote]

So when the player in question comes off and has no idea at all that he has been yellow carded and relays this to the bench, who subsequently replace him, there is NIL fault on the umpire for correct procedure of the issuing of the yellow card? Get your head out of the clouds buddy. Facts are that the card was not issued correctly, the ump issued a free kick and 50m penalty (i believe this to be AFL rules so which set of rules are we applying? the ones that suit the argument it seems). IF the card was issued correctly for all to see and understand why would the Emu's replace the player? Would seem strange?[/quote]

When sending the Flaggies player off the umpire walked to within 15 metres of the boundary and showed the card, as this didn't happen for anyone else, and the player in question was dragging himself for the 50, it is understandable their was confusion.

Dragging yourself after giving a 50m penalty has been a team rule all year so no one thought anything other than that.

As for it being referred to the Board AFTER the game? What a joke![/quote]

Checked the SFL handbook tonight, and as I expected the actions on the umpires in this case were exactly correct !!
The current rule leaves it up to the "Controlling Body" to issue the penalty.
The umpires when issuing a yellow card do not need to escort a player to the boundary, only show it to the player and to the Stewards and the timekeepers - well, I saw the yellow card from the other end of the ground, so I'd expect the steward saw it - if he/she was even looking !!
And all this crap about "the player in question was dragging himself for the 50, it is understandable their was confusion." is not understandable !!! The player that was sent off wasn't the guy that gave away the 50's ... and he knew damn well he'd been sent off

[The Lova]

Some comments:
1. The umpires have acted totally in accordance with the instructions issued to them by the Umpires panel (or the SFL) - I got this from an SFL umpire who was not one of the ones officiating. That is, that in any case of a "count", the scores are to be noted at that time and the incident reported to the Board for action. I don't actually agree with this by the way - I think that the scores should be immediately cancelled, at least that way everyone knows where they stand ! I think that the actual rules are quite clear that a team found to have to many players on the field loses their score to thet point in the match, it's just that the AFL has gone soft on this with their new rules - but we don't play by AFL rules, we play by SFL rules which follow the SANFL.
2. I don't agree that the ump concerned erred in not indicating the yellow card correctly, he clearly showed it (I could see from the other end of the ground) and then walked half-way to the interchange bench following the player before he went back to deal with the melee that was re-erupting.
3. As a long-time Team Manager and Interchange Steward, there is no doubt in my mind that the fault was totally in the court of the Morphies officials. Everyone should know that if there is any doubt whether there is a send-off you confirm it with either the players or the umps before you send a player on. .. and in this case there should have been no doubt that there may have been a send-off. To say that they thought it was just a player running off for "self-discipline " after a 50m penalty is crap - that player had already well and truly run off after giving 2x50m before the melee even happened !!

So when the player in question comes off and has no idea at all that he has been yellow carded and relays this to the bench, who subsequently replace him, there is NIL fault on the umpire for correct procedure of the issuing of the yellow card? Get your head out of the clouds buddy. Facts are that the card was not issued correctly, the ump issued a free kick and 50m penalty (i believe this to be AFL rules so which set of rules are we applying? the ones that suit the argument it seems). IF the card was issued correctly for all to see and understand why would the Emu's replace the player? Would seem strange?[/quote]

When sending the Flaggies player off the umpire walked to within 15 metres of the boundary and showed the card, as this didn't happen for anyone else, and the player in question was dragging himself for the 50, it is understandable their was confusion.

Dragging yourself after giving a 50m penalty has been a team rule all year so no one thought anything other than that.

As for it being referred to the Board AFTER the game? What a joke![/quote]

Checked the SFL handbook tonight, and as I expected the actions on the umpires in this case were exactly correct !!
The current rule leaves it up to the "Controlling Body" to issue the penalty.
The umpires when issuing a yellow card do not need to escort a player to the boundary, only show it to the player and to the Stewards and the timekeepers - well, I saw the yellow card from the other end of the ground, so I'd expect the steward saw it - if he/she was even looking !!
And all this crap about "the player in question was dragging himself for the 50, it is understandable their was confusion." is not understandable !!! The player that was sent off wasn't the guy that gave away the 50's ... and he knew damn well he'd been sent off [/quote]

I understand that according to matteeG you are the "guru" of all time keepers/interhange stewards.
but we have already said that BOTH interchange stewards DIDNT see the umpire give the yellow card. not just the morphies one BUT BOTH!!!!!! they both said it at the time of the confusion.
When you say you saw it so you EXPECT that they did. there view was obviously blocked by the massive group of players fighting. so they BOTH didnt see it. thus the umpire didnt give the yellow card properly. The yellow card was given as the player was half way off the ground and his back was obviously to the players/umpire so he didn t see it either. so that is another incorrect issue of the yellow card by the umpire. as stated by your rules above. so thanks for the clarfication.
I understand you saw it but unfortuantely a bloke sitting on the sidelines watching the game isnt the most important person in this situation. Maybe you should take up your position as "guru" timekeeper/interchange steward and teach the new breed how its done.

[Real McCoy]

EMUS - Have now seen all the top teams play and these guys are number 1.
WINEFLYS
TOWNIES
COVE- Seen them last week, won't make it to Prelim Finals.
ROOS- A must win to still have a chance.
VIKINGS - This was interesting, Ben Porter at Morphy Pk on Wed night.
MMMMMMMMM !!!!!!
RAMS- Sorry Shoe Boy, but a Rams win will help the Roos.

[spanner]

Give up Dazza44 even with a 9 goal head start you guys still cant get close.
lets get on with the big games this weekend.

[Lunchbox Legend]

As for it being referred to the Board AFTER the game? What a joke![/quote]


I do not believe that it was referred to the Board. I think that one little chap (often referred to as "Passion Fingers") made the decision on his own. I believe that he just adjusted goal scorers etc without reference to anyone, he just made things up. This probably explains why SFL records are not terribly accurate these days.

[Esteban Vihaio]

EMUS - Have now seen all the top teams play and these guys are number 1.
WINEFLYS
TOWNIES
COVE- Seen them last week, won't make it to Prelim Finals.
ROOS- A must win to still have a chance.
VIKINGS - This was interesting, Ben Porter at Morphy Pk on Wed night.
MMMMMMMMM !!!!!!
RAMS- Sorry Shoe Boy, but a Rams win will help the Roos.

O.K. I'll bite
Since he played and coached there for 7 - 10 years, he could be just catching up with mates and you are just stiring sh*t or was there actually a conversation that made it interesting.

[Legend killer]

[quote="Real McCoy"]EMUS - Have now seen all the top teams play and these guys are number 1.
WINEFLYS
TOWNIES
COVE- Seen them last week, won't make it to Prelim Finals.
ROOS- A must win to still have a chance.
VIKINGS - This was interesting, Ben Porter at Morphy Pk on Wed night.
MMMMMMMMM !!!!!!
RAMS- Sorry Shoe Boy, but a Rams win will help the Roos.[/quote]

have heard not sure if its true that vikings coach porter got into a dust up with a snr agrade player saturday night can anyone else confirm this or is it rubbish

[Kart Horse]

Saw A Grima named on the pine for glenelg reserves. Is he the guy who played last week for Morphie Parks or Will he still be playing against christies this week? Heard he was a classy midfielder! Good contest for Bachmann!