Tribunal discussion/views/debate

[BigRed42]

If he has indeed been the best player in the comp, begs the question why no AFL side has picked him up when Callinan, Philips, Lower, Duigan and Puopolo were at the end of last season

Quite simple really. As far as I am aware he has never put his name in the draft pool since he has been in SA. I think he might have been looked at when he played in the VFL though

[FlyingHigh]

Looking at the videos, Campbell 50-50, wasn't overly forceful contact, so would have thought a reprimand.
The only way Sutherland could have been a report is if the umpire thought he hit him with an elbow, but didn't seem as though he did - so either nothing or 3-4 weeks, not this one-week rubbish.

[w_m]

CAMPBELL, SUTHERLAND OFFERED ONE MATCH
NORWOOD midfielder Bryce Campbell will front the SANFL tribunal tonight to argue a one-week ban for forceful front-on contact.
Central District was yesterday considering whether to do the same and fight ruckman Jason Sutherland's one-game suspension for the same charge.
Campbell was reported in the first quarter of Norwood's loss to South Adelaide while Sutherland was reported in the second term of the Dogs' win over North Adelaide.

From http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6135048919

Gobsmacked on both accounts

Total disgrace.

I consider these to be 2 of the very worst decisions ever handed down by the tribunal.

Sutherland was clearly a bump in the side and Campbell had his hands on the footy and was simply a footy collision.

What a joke.

[HOORAY PUNT]

Makes it interesting . So no Sutherland(at this point ) in the 2nd and a potentially big call on Gowans for the 2nd Semi .If Central wins the 2nd semi that means Sutherland has not played for 3 weeks which gives a slight advanatge to the opposition I would think. Not ideal for Central winnning the 2nd semi, as they have had a lot of players miss with inkuries annd that MAY catch up on them GFday (assuming they make it)

Good bump by Sutherland from what I saw.

[Wedgie]

Must admit looking at the video the Sutherland report looks a lot different than it did from the outer.
Seeing the video or a similar angle like some of the Dogs fans (and North fans) did I'd be incensed at that report as it doesn't appear to make any high contact.
From the outer view where we were (and the same angle as the umpire) it looked exactly the same as the Brett Backwell report the week before if not worse and looked dangerous.
I'd hope with ones like that the umpire would also look at the video and be given the opportunity to withdraw the report as Thring did get back up and I'd like to see the benefit of the doubt going the players way (or at least ask Thring where he felt the contact).

Campbell one is quite unique in that he went down so low but it was reckless. Not sure what to make of it but once again, it might have looked different from another angle but once again I'd like to see the players given the benefit of the doubt.

The amount of punches to heads I've seen from players in the last couple of years have resulted in zero reports but the amount of hip and shoulders I've seen with good intent get reported would be well into double figures.

I'd like to see a new person in charge of the umpires as they appear to be just following instructions and bad instructions at that.

[Grahaml]

Word is Sutherland was cleared.

[JK]

Word is Sutherland was cleared.

As was Campbell

[Wedgie]

Good, I wouldn't want to see either player have to miss a final for stuff like that.

[Big Phil]

Word is Sutherland was cleared.

Confirmed by club Director and Legal Rep Steve Clarke on the CDFC's Facebook page.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/CentralDistrictFC

[CENTURION]

TFFT!!

[Hazydog]

Sanity prevails then - although both reports should have been withdrawn yesterday IMO.

For years now the SANFL has distanced itself from the AFL's obsession with constant, (and in most cases unnecessary), change.

This year we suddenly have the points system and a 180 degree change in umpiring interpretations, clearly more aligned with the AFL. Are we finally under the thumb completely?

[CENTURION]

yet SOME people think it's a good thing!

[CedeNullis]

My head has stopped spinning around now and blood pressure returned to normal.

[jim5112]

If he has indeed been the best player in the comp, begs the question why no AFL side has picked him up when Callinan, Philips, Lower, Duigan and Puopolo were at the end of last season

Quite simple really. As far as I am aware he has never put his name in the draft pool since he has been in SA. I think he might have been looked at when he played in the VFL though

The AFL clubs would all be well aware of him. He is too small and not quick enough for AFL. I noticed last weekend his kicks were all short passes. Can he kick it long? If not, that would be another reason.

[on the rails]

As I said on the game day thread - Sutherland was unlucky to be even have given a free kick away let alone being reported. Fortunately the Tribunal got it correct.

[Wedgie]

Sanity prevails then - although both reports should have been withdrawn yesterday IMO.

For years now the SANFL has distanced itself from the AFL's obsession with constant, (and in most cases unnecessary), change.

This year we suddenly have the points system and a 180 degree change in umpiring interpretations, clearly more aligned with the AFL. Are we finally under the thumb completely?

The only difference about this year is reports for sling tackles. Players getting reported in the SANFL for bumps and other ridiculous things has been going on for 3 years.

[FlyingHigh]

Must admit looking at the video the Sutherland report looks a lot different than it did from the outer.
Seeing the video or a similar angle like some of the Dogs fans (and North fans) did I'd be incensed at that report as it doesn't appear to make any high contact.
From the outer view where we were (and the same angle as the umpire) it looked exactly the same as the Brett Backwell report the week before if not worse and looked dangerous.
I'd hope with ones like that the umpire would also look at the video and be given the opportunity to withdraw the report as Thring did get back up and I'd like to see the benefit of the doubt going the players way (or at least ask Thring where he felt the contact).

.

Agree with this. In the old days a punch or elbow or kick was fairly clear-cut. With the umpires being instructed to report many more in-the-play actions, is it no wonder they occasionally get it wrong with the pace of the game. Perhaps they could have a yellow card which signifies they want to look at that incident after the game and then decide whether to report or not?

[Apachebulldog]

I was there match day and witnessed the great bump as i said before this was not a reportable offence also to the North supporter who called Sutherland a thug you got it wrong my friend !!

[Hazydog]

Sanity prevails then - although both reports should have been withdrawn yesterday IMO.

For years now the SANFL has distanced itself from the AFL's obsession with constant, (and in most cases unnecessary), change.

This year we suddenly have the points system and a 180 degree change in umpiring interpretations, clearly more aligned with the AFL. Are we finally under the thumb completely?

The only difference about this year is reports for sling tackles. Players getting reported in the SANFL for bumps and other ridiculous things has been going on for 3 years.

Probably right there, my Finals Challenged friend, I reckon I've noticed it more because with the points system more reports are turning into suspensions. At least it seems that way - not sure what the figures would be compared to the last few years.

[The Apostle]

Pumpa's report: f'kn disgrace!
Campbell's report: free kick!