Preliminary Final

[Aerie]

If only Sharrad did the job properly like Skipworth did.

[Wedgie]

Cheats, North would have got an extra couple of goals if Troppo wasn't on the bench getting treatment. All things being consistent and fair I assume the Eagles get a 10k fine and lose 4 premiership points next year.

But Troppo wasn't on the bench getting treatment; which is why this thread is so entertaining!

He was in the third.

[Look Good In Leather]

Same penalty given to North as was given to Willaston for breaking the salary cap rules

[mots02]

Cheats, North would have got an extra couple of goals if Troppo wasn't on the bench getting treatment. All things being consistent and fair I assume the Eagles get a 10k fine and lose 4 premiership points next year.

I know its easier in hindsight and all but maybe this whole thing might have been a bit cleaner and neater if one of the many, many North Officials in and around the bench had ensured that Troppo had stayed there on the bench where he should have been?

[whybother]

This is my first post on this site. Therefore I am a "virgin" so please treat me kindly. Regarding the "wet lettuce" penalty that the learned judge imposed:

1. Each side in the GF gets at least $10k prizemoney from the SANFL, so NA don't lose any money from their own planned 2018 budget. The money just goes around in a circle.

2. The 4 point "penalty" for 2019 isn't necessarily a penalty. If NA finishes 6th or lower on the unadjusted 2019 end-of-season table, then deducting 4 points is of no consequence to them. The 4 points deduction only has substantial consequence if NA finish 5th or higher on the 2019 table. Then the adjustment would re-position their place in the finals playoff. The deduction could put them out of the final 5, but only if at least one lower placed team was within 4 points and had a better percentage. If the current 2018 table was repeated next year then NA with 22 points would still stay in the final 5 ahead of Glenelg with 18 points. In this case, it seems a strange NA penalty that relies on Glenelg, West, Central and (horror) the 2 AFL reserve teams performing better in 2019 than 2018.

[Trent Plucktrum]

If only Sharrad did the job properly like Skipworth did.

Didn't hear us whinge about it did you We gave up around 5 years after the event

[oldfella]

This is my first post on this site. Therefore I am a "virgin" so please treat me kindly. Regarding the "wet lettuce" penalty that the learned judge imposed:

1. Each side in the GF gets at least $10k prizemoney from the SANFL, so NA don't lose any money from their own planned 2018 budget. The money just goes around in a circle.

2. The 4 point "penalty" for 2019 isn't necessarily a penalty. If NA finishes 6th or lower on the unadjusted 2019 end-of-season table, then deducting 4 points is of no consequence to them. The 4 points deduction only has substantial consequence if NA finish 5th or higher on the 2019 table. Then the adjustment would re-position their place in the finals playoff. The deduction could put them out of the final 5, but only if at least one lower placed team was within 4 points and had a better percentage. If the current 2018 table was repeated next year then NA with 22 points would still stay in the final 5 ahead of Glenelg with 18 points. In this case, it seems a strange NA penalty that relies on Glenelg, West, Central and (horror) the 2 AFL reserve teams performing better in 2019 than 2018.

Welcome mate

[Wedgie]

This is my first post on this site. Therefore I am a "virgin" so please treat me kindly. Regarding the "wet lettuce" penalty that the learned judge imposed:

1. Each side in the GF gets at least $10k prizemoney from the SANFL, so NA don't lose any money from their own planned 2018 budget. The money just goes around in a circle.

2. The 4 point "penalty" for 2019 isn't necessarily a penalty. If NA finishes 6th or lower on the unadjusted 2019 end-of-season table, then deducting 4 points is of no consequence to them. The 4 points deduction only has substantial consequence if NA finish 5th or higher on the 2019 table. Then the adjustment would re-position their place in the finals playoff. The deduction could put them out of the final 5, but only if at least one lower placed team was within 4 points and had a better percentage. If the current 2018 table was repeated next year then NA with 22 points would still stay in the final 5 ahead of Glenelg with 18 points. In this case, it seems a strange NA penalty that relies on Glenelg, West, Central and (horror) the 2 AFL reserve teams performing better in 2019 than 2018.

Fair points mate, you're right about the prize money and that doesn't take into account extra money that will be raised through merchandise, me berships, etc but I think I read somewhere it is the maximum financial oenalty they could apply. North are very financial and it will mean stuff all.

The 4 point next year might be a big penalty and it might not. If North had had 4 points less this year it would have had no impact on the final ladder (but would have made the last game when they beat the Power by only 5 points more interesting!). Have to wait and see but it could cost them a double chance and/or a finals spot next year. So many "possibles". Imagine if they came top next year but had to play in an elimination final, it wouldn't be too fair on the team they're playing! It might even fire up North next year so they end up better off than they would have!
Its a penalty that compromises the comp to a degree next year, I dont like it for that reason.

North wouldn't have copped any penalty next year if a head count had been called, as one wasn't called no penalty should have been applied but the SANFL probably felt the need to address the hysteria.

[Lightning McQueen]

This is my first post on this site. Therefore I am a "virgin" so please treat me kindly. Regarding the "wet lettuce" penalty that the learned judge imposed:

1. Each side in the GF gets at least $10k prizemoney from the SANFL, so NA don't lose any money from their own planned 2018 budget. The money just goes around in a circle.

2. The 4 point "penalty" for 2019 isn't necessarily a penalty. If NA finishes 6th or lower on the unadjusted 2019 end-of-season table, then deducting 4 points is of no consequence to them. The 4 points deduction only has substantial consequence if NA finish 5th or higher on the 2019 table. Then the adjustment would re-position their place in the finals playoff. The deduction could put them out of the final 5, but only if at least one lower placed team was within 4 points and had a better percentage. If the current 2018 table was repeated next year then NA with 22 points would still stay in the final 5 ahead of Glenelg with 18 points. In this case, it seems a strange NA penalty that relies on Glenelg, West, Central and (horror) the 2 AFL reserve teams performing better in 2019 than 2018.

Fair points mate, you're right about the prize money and that doesn't take into account extra money that will be raised through merchandise, me berships, etc but I think I read somewhere it is the maximum financial oenalty they could apply. North are very financial and it will mean stuff all.

The 4 point next year might be a big penalty and it might not. If North had had 4 points less this year it would have had no impact on the final ladder (but would have made the last game when they beat the Power by only 5 points more interesting!). Have to wait and see but it could cost them a double chance and/or a finals spot next year. So many "possibles". Imagine if they came top next year but had to play in an elimination final, it wouldn't be too fair on the team they're playing! It might even fire up North next year so they end up better off than they would have!
Its a penalty that compromises the comp to a degree next year, I dont like it for that reason.

North wouldn't have copped any penalty next year if a head count had been called, as one wasn't called no penalty should have been applied but the SANFL probably felt the need to address the hysteria.

[Trader]

North wouldn't have copped any penalty next year if a head count had been called, as one wasn't called no penalty should have been applied but the SANFL probably felt the need to address the hysteria.

I actually agree with this.

I think North should play the GF then challenge the 4 point penalty during the off-season.

It's a made up punishment for a transgression that already had a procedure laid out that wasn't followed.

[Lightning McQueen]

North wouldn't have copped any penalty next year if a head count had been called, as one wasn't called no penalty should have been applied but the SANFL probably felt the need to address the hysteria.

I actually agree with this.

I think North should play the GF then challenge the 4 point penalty during the off-season.

It's a made up punishment for a transgression that already had a procedure laid out that wasn't followed.

Would've seen Eagles get a free in the goal square and the flow stemmed, would've sent some panic through the camp and unsettled the team.

All hypothetical's though, it was more about bringing the game into disrepute by "accidentally" cheating.

Who cares if the 4th umpire was alerted, the rule states for the captain to approach the field umpire, it didn't happen, I'm sure there will be a new set of rules as of 2019, probably nationwide.

[therisingblues]

FFS this forum & Stephen 5AA Crow whose son plays for eagles - LET IT GO!

This whole 19th man saga was a blessing for the Eagles for losing the un loseable game from 47pts up in the 3rd qtr, & it took all
the talk away from the poor performance & the Roosters amazing comeback.

19th man had minimal impact anyway & north belted the Eagles after that going up by 22 pts - a 69 point turn around in a bit over a qtr.
Decision made - GAME OVER!

I wouldnt give it up if it happened to Centrals. Ridiculous the judge supposedly couldn't implement his desired solution. Again glad it happened to Slaven but feel for the Eagles supporters.

Spot on.
If this had happened to Sturt, I'd have trouble "letting go" also.
There SHOULD have been a head count, there wasn't. Had there been one, North would have had its score erased up to that point.
I don't see the point in pursuing it after the fact however. I don't want to see games decided in court rooms, and I think the AFL was full of shit how they came out with their obvious boner, claiming that THEY'D have overturned the resul;t.
Could you imagine the AFL overturning a Hawthorn or a Collingwood victory in an AFL Preliminary final, because it was later proved that 19 men had been on the ground for 3 and a half minutes?
North very, very lucky IMO.

[Lightning McQueen]

FFS this forum & Stephen 5AA Crow whose son plays for eagles - LET IT GO!

This whole 19th man saga was a blessing for the Eagles for losing the un loseable game from 47pts up in the 3rd qtr, & it took all
the talk away from the poor performance & the Roosters amazing comeback.

19th man had minimal impact anyway & north belted the Eagles after that going up by 22 pts - a 69 point turn around in a bit over a qtr.
Decision made - GAME OVER!

I wouldnt give it up if it happened to Centrals. Ridiculous the judge supposedly couldn't implement his desired solution. Again glad it happened to Slaven but feel for the Eagles supporters.

Spot on.
If this had happened to Sturt, I'd have trouble "letting go" also.
There SHOULD have been a head count, there wasn't. Had there been one, North would have had its score erased up to that point.
I don't see the point in pursuing it after the fact however. I don't want to see games decided in court rooms, and I think the AFL was full of shit how they came out with their obvious boner, claiming that THEY'D have overturned the resul;t.
Could you imagine the AFL overturning a Hawthorn or a Collingwood victory in an AFL Preliminary final, because it was later proved that 19 men had been on the ground for 3 and a half minutes?
North very, very lucky IMO.

No, the Eagles get a free kick in their attacking goal square, if they called a count and there's only 18 North players on the field, North would've got a free kick in their attacking goal square.

[Trent Plucktrum]

North wouldn't have copped any penalty next year if a head count had been called, as one wasn't called no penalty should have been applied but the SANFL probably felt the need to address the hysteria.

I actually agree with this.

I think North should play the GF then challenge the 4 point penalty during the off-season.

It's a made up punishment for a transgression that already had a procedure laid out that wasn't followed.

Would've seen Eagles get a free in the goal square and the flow stemmed, would've sent some panic through the camp and unsettled the team.

All hypothetical's though, it was more about bringing the game into disrepute by "accidentally" cheating.

Who cares if the 4th umpire was alerted, the rule states for the captain to approach the field umpire, it didn't happen, I'm sure there will be a new set of rules as of 2019, probably nationwide.

You did stem the flow after the player went off as you had the next four scoring shots for a return of 1 goal 3 points and really failed to capitalize on your efforts. If it had been 3.1 or even 2.2 i'm thinking a different result on the cards so just another area that didn't help your club as it had plenty of opportunity to wrestle the game back but failed and i been following this thread and realize you have been very even minded in regards to this which is something we won't know how mental North fans may of been but i'm pretty sure i have a fair idea .

[therisingblues]

FFS this forum & Stephen 5AA Crow whose son plays for eagles - LET IT GO!

This whole 19th man saga was a blessing for the Eagles for losing the un loseable game from 47pts up in the 3rd qtr, & it took all
the talk away from the poor performance & the Roosters amazing comeback.

19th man had minimal impact anyway & north belted the Eagles after that going up by 22 pts - a 69 point turn around in a bit over a qtr.
Decision made - GAME OVER!

I wouldnt give it up if it happened to Centrals. Ridiculous the judge supposedly couldn't implement his desired solution. Again glad it happened to Slaven but feel for the Eagles supporters.

Spot on.
If this had happened to Sturt, I'd have trouble "letting go" also.
There SHOULD have been a head count, there wasn't. Had there been one, North would have had its score erased up to that point.
I don't see the point in pursuing it after the fact however. I don't want to see games decided in court rooms, and I think the AFL was full of shit how they came out with their obvious boner, claiming that THEY'D have overturned the resul;t.
Could you imagine the AFL overturning a Hawthorn or a Collingwood victory in an AFL Preliminary final, because it was later proved that 19 men had been on the ground for 3 and a half minutes?
North very, very lucky IMO.

No, the Eagles get a free kick in their attacking goal square, if they called a count and there's only 18 North players on the field, North would've got a free kick in their attacking goal square.

?
Have I missed a whole heap of conversation about this? Was the rule change in place before the North game?

[Wedgie]

A free kick plus 50 metres is the penalty if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has 18 or less at the time of the count.
A score is wiped up to that point if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has more than 18 at the time of the count.

Separately, an interchange infringement if called by the 4th umpire incurs a free plus 50m. An extra player coming off through the interchange gate is not an interchange infringement.

None of the above happened so it should have just been play on.

[therisingblues]

A free kick plus 50 metres is the penalty if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has 18 or less at the time of the count.
A score is wiped up to that point if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has more than 18 at the time of the count.

Separately, an interchange infringement if called by the 4th umpire incurs a free plus 50m. An extra player coming off through the interchange gate is not an interchange infringement.

None of the above happened so it should have just been play on.

Thanks for the clarification there Wedgie. I think I see how people are getting mixed up.
True: None of the above happened, and I still cannot fathom why the Eagles didn't send a runner out telling their captain to call for a count.
The Judge presiding over this affair actually said that it was unrealistic to expect the Eagles captain to do so.
Sorry for not reading this whole thread to see if this has already been discussed, but I cannot follow the Judge's reasoning on that.

[Lightning McQueen]

A free kick plus 50 metres is the penalty if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has 18 or less at the time of the count.
A score is wiped up to that point if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has more than 18 at the time of the count.

Separately, an interchange infringement if called by the 4th umpire incurs a free plus 50m. An extra player coming off through the interchange gate is not an interchange infringement.

None of the above happened so it should have just been play on.

The total score?

There is only one other league in the state that still plays by that rule, would've thought they've adapted to the newer system.

[Lightning McQueen]

You did stem the flow after the player went off as you had the next four scoring shots for a return of 1 goal 3 points and really failed to capitalize on your efforts. If it had been 3.1 or even 2.2 i'm thinking a different result on the cards so just another area that didn't help your club as it had plenty of opportunity to wrestle the game back but failed and i been following this thread and realize you have been very even minded in regards to this which is something we won't know how mental North fans may of been but i'm pretty sure i have a fair idea .

North won, Eagles failed to intervene when they should've, I'm annoyed we lost, I'm annoyed that North fielded too many but I'm more annoyed at the coaching staff's negligence.........................and the surrendering of a 47 point lead.

[Lightning McQueen]

A free kick plus 50 metres is the penalty if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has 18 or less at the time of the count.
A score is wiped up to that point if a captain calls a count and the opposing team has more than 18 at the time of the count.

Separately, an interchange infringement if called by the 4th umpire incurs a free plus 50m. An extra player coming off through the interchange gate is not an interchange infringement.

None of the above happened so it should have just been play on.

The total score?

There is only one other league in the state that still plays by that rule, would've thought they've adapted to the newer system.

Wow, just checked it, an even bigger f up LOL