by norwood8 » Tue May 12, 2015 6:47 pm
by spell_check » Tue May 12, 2015 10:41 pm
by therisingblues » Wed May 13, 2015 12:07 am
by southee » Wed May 13, 2015 12:13 am
by heater31 » Wed May 13, 2015 9:23 am
by carey » Wed May 13, 2015 9:31 am
heater31 wrote:Port will get slapped with a wet fish over this.....
by Bounce of the ball » Wed May 13, 2015 10:35 am
by Rising Power » Wed May 13, 2015 11:56 am
by wild dog » Wed May 13, 2015 12:07 pm
carey wrote:heater31 wrote:Port will get slapped with a wet fish over this.....
Yeah I guess Warrior and Wilson should be sentenced to 6-8 months behind bars???? Oh and Budda 3 months as an accessory to the major crime.
This is news? pffft give me a break!
If it was any other club apart from Port or Adelaide there would be no discussion at all.
by Ronnie » Wed May 13, 2015 12:09 pm
Rising Power wrote:It's the umpires' responsibility to police the presence of officials on the field. FFS there are 7 of them out there, plus the emergency umpire who sits between the two boxes! All it takes is one free kick to be awarded and it will stop, eventually.
by tipper » Wed May 13, 2015 12:21 pm
Ronnie wrote:Rising Power wrote:It's the umpires' responsibility to police the presence of officials on the field. FFS there are 7 of them out there, plus the emergency umpire who sits between the two boxes! All it takes is one free kick to be awarded and it will stop, eventually.
I was thinking that myself, were the umpires asleep? The spare umpire would be in a decent position you would think to cotton on to what they were doing.
Forget about some measly money penalty, sanction them on game day. It will stop soon enough.
by Rising Power » Wed May 13, 2015 12:34 pm
tipper wrote:
i dont know that it will if the penalty is on game day. give away a few free kicks? who cares when the magpies are now all about teaching their players about the structures etc that the afl club wants. they dont care about the wins, its all about the development. however, hit the club that is constantly bleating about not making money with a financial penalty, that is a penalty they will take notice of.......
by tipper » Wed May 13, 2015 12:42 pm
by Pseudo » Wed May 13, 2015 1:19 pm
Rising Power wrote: the official can be reported, (I assume) sent from the field if reported twice and then sanctioned/banned for a number of weeks by the SANFL tribunal.
by Rising Power » Wed May 13, 2015 1:46 pm
Pseudo wrote:Rising Power wrote: the official can be reported, (I assume) sent from the field if reported twice and then sanctioned/banned for a number of weeks by the SANFL tribunal.
Really? On the rare occasion that a runner has been referred to the SANFL tribunal, the runner has escaped without penalty, due to the tribunal claiming no existing guidelines for dealing with non-players. (IIRC).
by therisingblues » Wed May 13, 2015 1:51 pm
Pseudo wrote:Rising Power wrote: the official can be reported, (I assume) sent from the field if reported twice and then sanctioned/banned for a number of weeks by the SANFL tribunal.
Really? On the rare occasion that a runner has been referred to the SANFL tribunal, the runner has escaped without penalty, due to the tribunal claiming no existing guidelines for dealing with non-players. (IIRC).
by Pseudo » Wed May 13, 2015 2:11 pm
therisingblues wrote:Pseudo wrote: On the rare occasion that a runner has been referred to the SANFL tribunal, the runner has escaped without penalty, due to the tribunal claiming no existing guidelines for dealing with non-players. (IIRC).
I missed a lot of recent SANFL history being overseas, but could you give a few examples of clubs doing this? I don't want to be a narrow thinker and ATM I can only think of the one club that has ever done this.
by Bounce of the ball » Wed May 13, 2015 2:31 pm
Rising Power wrote:It's the umpires' responsibility to police the presence of officials on the field. FFS there are 7 of them out there, plus the emergency umpire who sits between the two boxes! All it takes is one free kick to be awarded and it will stop, eventually.
by therisingblues » Wed May 13, 2015 2:32 pm
Pseudo wrote:therisingblues wrote:Pseudo wrote: On the rare occasion that a runner has been referred to the SANFL tribunal, the runner has escaped without penalty, due to the tribunal claiming no existing guidelines for dealing with non-players. (IIRC).
I missed a lot of recent SANFL history being overseas, but could you give a few examples of clubs doing this? I don't want to be a narrow thinker and ATM I can only think of the one club that has ever done this.
I could only think of The One Club too. I deliberately worded my comment to play down this aspect.
by stan » Wed May 13, 2015 5:42 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |