Is the current SANFL tribunal sytem working ???

[JK]

I guess I've not been too unhappy with our tribunal system for a couple of reasons:

1. Norwood haven't had any/many front before it this season ... I'm not trying to say it's not important for that reason, but when none of your own are involved I guess you to to spend less time worrying about it, no doubt our turn will come and my stance will probably change.

2. Whislt there does seem to be quite a bit of fluctuation in verdicts and sentences, it doesn't sound as though we're seeing any REALLY ugly incidences ocurring (think Hall and Solomon), and I hate to see a bloke, any bloke, miss a week(s) for anything that seems rather minor/trivial.

One question ... I wonder how the umpires feel sending blokes up regularly only to see the tribunal release them without penalty ... Almost akin to the Police regularly catching repeat offenders yet they seem to get back out among the public on a regular basis.

[Big Phil]

Interesting to hear Zac Milbank make a few comments on the SANFL Tribunal System on the 5RPH League Teams show tonight...

He is of the opinion, like fellow Advertiser journo, Warren Partland that there have just been way too many inconsistancies with their decision making and lack there of in some instances. Would be interesting if one of them wrote an article in the paper on it, might make the people involved down at West Lakes realise that their current system is flawed and needs addressing...

[CUTTERMAN]

What's your opinion of the current SANFL tribunal system

Is currently a JOKE and needs a complete overhaul
Should follow suite of the AFL with a points system
Current system is okay, nothing needs to be changed
Don't have an opinion, so don't really care what they do

What about a choice like, Current system is okay, but needs refining. I wouldn't pick any of the above.

[Big Phil]

What's your opinion of the current SANFL tribunal system

Is currently a JOKE and needs a complete overhaul
Should follow suite of the AFL with a points system
Current system is okay, nothing needs to be changed
Don't have an opinion, so don't really care what they do

What about a choice like, Current system is okay, but needs refining. I wouldn't pick any of the above.

Hey Cutterman,

I was looking at the poll options last night before I went to bed and did think that there was probably an option like your suggestion missing. I have added something along those lines but it means the poll starts afresh. So everyone will have to recast their vote, if they want to...

Cheers,

Big Phil...

[CUTTERMAN]

Now in casting my vote, I can't believe how many people have voted that it's a joke. Isn't part of what we like about the comp is that there is still abit of biff and bash, hard contact and not over umpired concerning ticky touch, touch someone in the back bulls__t? I'll admit that I've been suprised that some have got off and some have been suspended but surely it's not that bad.

[JK]

Well said Cutterman

[Wedgie]

Now in casting my vote, I can't believe how many people have voted that it's a joke. Isn't part of what we like about the comp is that there is still abit of biff and bash, hard contact and not over umpired concerning ticky touch, touch someone in the back bulls__t? I'll admit that I've been suprised that some have got off and some have been suspended but surely it's not that bad.

It's got nothing to do with liking a bit of bash, its got everything to do with being consistent.
The AFL system is extremely consistent and everyone knows exactly what sort of penalty every player will get for every incident (with half a bit of knowledge).
The SANFL system has no consistency.
I would prefer a system that allowed a bit more biff but if you gave me the choice of a system that allowed no biff but was fully consistent and a system that allowed biff but was completely inconsistent I'd take the first option every time as would anyone with any sort of understanding of the game.
The current AFL systems if the first system in my entire lifetime that is predictable, consistent and the same for everyone.
It's the only way to go.
Yeah sure, allow more biff, but keep the same consistency that the current AFL system has.
The only people that think the AFL system isn't consistent have made no study of the system. Ive succesfully predicted the amount of weeks every person who has been reported in the AFL that has been on a serious charge within a week. Would love that sort of consistency with the SANFL, not even close though, might as well as through a die.

[Big Phil]

Thanks for that comment Wedgie...

That is the EXACT point I have tried to make from the get go with this poll and my resulting comments. I thought I would just make it a bit more interactive with the varying poll questions as to get a feel for what the general consensus of the SANFL tribunal system. At times this year, and in the past, the decisions (or more so, lack of) have been somewhat bewildering and more often than not, a tad confusing and always, the underlining factor, inconsistent. I know the SANFL don't have the resources to follow suite of the AFL with a points system but they need to find something that makes their system a bit more predictable in terms of consistent outcomes.

I'm sure we all understand the variable nature of individual cases but what is frustrating for supporters, players and the clubs alike, is that one week an indiscretion will receive a certain punishment, say a 2 week suspension, then on other occasions, a player will be reported for pretty much the same thing and they end up getting almost the opposite outcome from the tribunal. In some particular instances this year, terrible inconsistency has been so blatantly obvious with certain players handed reprimands (which seem to be the flavour of the year for the tribunal system) and then others copping suspension for what has seemed to be exactly the same thing. Inconsistency in terms of deliberating an outcome from individual incidents that have a very similar nature from earlier in the year is a concern and I am still of the opinion that something has to change.

Now of course each case is individually heard and has to be treated that way, but there needs to be some kind of clarity, and that word again, consistency, in all cases overall in terms of the outcomes. Now, yes, I'll use an example involving a Centrals player, but no, it's not sour grapes, just pointing out a perfect example of the confusing nature of the current tribunal system in place. Paul Thomas copped a 1 week suspension for "headbutting" when in actual fact he pushed Kingsley Walker, who was up in his face, away with his forehead. Impact was very minimal and there was no malice or intent to headbutt in the traditional sense of the word. Last week, young Rooster Kriston Thompson was reported for what was described as exactly the same thing, "headbutting" technically but using his forehead to push James Gallagher away. Now I didn't see this particular incident, but on face value sounds almost identical to the Thomas incident and yet the North Adelaide lad only received a reprimand.

That's a classic example of inconsitant outcomes from very similar incidents, which again, is really really frustrating and at times, almost farcical. I think the other thing that needs to be addressed is that fact that players can be reported for similar indiscretions on more than one occasion throughout the course of the season and yet they are not being punished as repeat offenders. Too many times, reprimands are handed out like lollies on a Halloween night and surely the tribunal need to send a message to the players fronting up repeatedly that there poor actions are not acceptable and they need to be punished accordingly in way of a suspension. Something simple, like if you come up against the tribunal for a second or maybe third time throughout the course of a season, then it's an automatic 1 week suspension.

All I know is that in my opinion, the current system is somewhat of a laughing stock and although I will not go as far to say it is a complete and utter joke and needs an total overhaul, I will say it has it's flaws and things need to be addressed to ensure adequate and consistent deliberation and that the resulting punishments are reasonable, fair precise and dare I say it, CONSISTANT. I know there are a certain few journalists who share similar sentiment to me on this issue and have actually vented their frustration and thoughts through print and radio media in weeks gone by so hopefully the people in charge down at West Lakes read the paper and listen to the radio thus ensuring they are made aware of what some followers of the SANFL think of their current tribunal system, maybe prompting then to at least address it at season end.

[CUTTERMAN]

Now in casting my vote, I can't believe how many people have voted that it's a joke. Isn't part of what we like about the comp is that there is still abit of biff and bash, hard contact and not over umpired concerning ticky touch, touch someone in the back bulls__t? I'll admit that I've been suprised that some have got off and some have been suspended but surely it's not that bad.

It's got nothing to do with liking a bit of bash, its got everything to do with being consistent.
The AFL system is extremely consistent and everyone knows exactly what sort of penalty every player will get for every incident (with half a bit of knowledge).
The SANFL system has no consistency.
I would prefer a system that allowed a bit more biff but if you gave me the choice of a system that allowed no biff but was fully consistent and a system that allowed biff but was completely inconsistent I'd take the first option every time as would anyone with any sort of understanding of the game.
The current AFL systems if the first system in my entire lifetime that is predictable, consistent and the same for everyone.
It's the only way to go.
Yeah sure, allow more biff, but keep the same consistency that the current AFL system has.
The only people that think the AFL system isn't consistent have made no study of the system. Ive succesfully predicted the amount of weeks every person who has been reported in the AFL that has been on a serious charge within a week. Would love that sort of consistency with the SANFL, not even close though, might as well as through a die.

I'll agree that the SANFL could improve in terms of consistency, but I still don't think it's that bad and one of the good points is that there aren't many reports facing the tribunal which would be more to do with the running of the comp and umpiring. Not sure I agree with your comments on the AFL's consistency, while it's better than it was as a whole this year I think it's been found lacking concerning the head high contact, very inconsistent this year and confusing.

[Big Phil]

In light of a couple of reports from the Centrals and Norwood game yesterday, including my mate Thommo (for a 3rd time this year !!?) it will be interesting to see the outcomes from these cases and in fact which tribunal rocks up to AAMI stadium on Tuesday night. I'm happy to be the first to admit that further from earlier comments written by myself in this topic, Paul Thomas, as a 3rd time repeat offender this year, should be suspended for at least 1 week (based on a system I suggested for punishing repeat offenders) but the current system the SANFL has in place doesn't have that rule so aof course, the outcome of his hearing will be based on the merits and facts of his individual incident, as to will that of Norwood ruckman, Kenrick Tyrell.

In Thommo's case, from the angle I saw it (underneath the scoreboard) both Paul and Tim Weatherald were both committed at going for the ball and with the abgle tha they "collided" on, it made it look worse than what it really was. It just looked like a collision between 2 guys hitting the ball hard and Timmy went to ground because Paul had a bit more momentum and pace and Tim is probably the lightest bloke going around. I think that Thommo being a repeat offender 2 times already doesn't look good on his part but if common sense prevails at the tribunal hearing, then they'll realise that the free kick paid to Weatherald was suffice and nothing more needs to be said or done. The other thing that stood out for me, that shoukd fall in Paul's favour is that Timmy bounced staright back up to take the free kick and not one of his Redlegs team mates came over to reminstrate with Thommo.

Now, I will say that I have made my views of the tribunal system quite clear on this very topic and it is for those very reasons that I wait until Tuesday night when the tribunal meet, with baited breathe as to what the outcome will be. There have been so many precidents set either way that Paul might get 3 weeks, he might get 1 and he might end up with a reprimand. The inconsistant nature of verdicts handed out by the SANFL is such that I really don't know what Paul can expect come 7.30pm Tuesday night after his case has been heard. As I have had to do so with some of the LifeFM radio work I've been doing, I can happily put my "neutral supporters" hat on and say that I honestly didn't think there was much in it and that at the time he got reported, I thought it was as slight over reaction from umpire Toby Medlin.

As for Norwood's Kenrick Tyrell being reported for striking Daniel Havelberg, I think similarly in terms of outcome to that of Thommos's report. Committed to spoiling the ball, Kenrick knocked Havelberg to the back of the head in a pack attempt to spoil the ball. I think the umpire paying the free and resulting 50m penalty was sufficient punishment, and although Centrals players heavily reminstrated afterwards, sticking up for their team mate, I think Kenrick would be unlucky to not recieve anything more than a reprimand. But then, once again, with the history of confusing penalties handed out so far this season, I would not be suprised if they do hand out a suspension, which would be wrong. Anyway, we will just have to wait now until Tuesday night now want we.

[spell_check]

Now in casting my vote, I can't believe how many people have voted that it's a joke. Isn't part of what we like about the comp is that there is still abit of biff and bash, hard contact and not over umpired concerning ticky touch, touch someone in the back bulls__t? I'll admit that I've been suprised that some have got off and some have been suspended but surely it's not that bad.

It's got nothing to do with liking a bit of bash, its got everything to do with being consistent.
The AFL system is extremely consistent and everyone knows exactly what sort of penalty every player will get for every incident (with half a bit of knowledge).
The SANFL system has no consistency.
I would prefer a system that allowed a bit more biff but if you gave me the choice of a system that allowed no biff but was fully consistent and a system that allowed biff but was completely inconsistent I'd take the first option every time as would anyone with any sort of understanding of the game.
The current AFL systems if the first system in my entire lifetime that is predictable, consistent and the same for everyone.
It's the only way to go.
Yeah sure, allow more biff, but keep the same consistency that the current AFL system has.
The only people that think the AFL system isn't consistent have made no study of the system. Ive succesfully predicted the amount of weeks every person who has been reported in the AFL that has been on a serious charge within a week. Would love that sort of consistency with the SANFL, not even close though, might as well as through a die.

How much does the points system depend on the number of cameras viewed to make decisions on how many points are given? The only stumbling point I can see is, does it rely on the cameras too much to use in the SANFL. If the case may be, that is.

[Wedgie]

Now in casting my vote, I can't believe how many people have voted that it's a joke. Isn't part of what we like about the comp is that there is still abit of biff and bash, hard contact and not over umpired concerning ticky touch, touch someone in the back bulls__t? I'll admit that I've been suprised that some have got off and some have been suspended but surely it's not that bad.

It's got nothing to do with liking a bit of bash, its got everything to do with being consistent.
The AFL system is extremely consistent and everyone knows exactly what sort of penalty every player will get for every incident (with half a bit of knowledge).
The SANFL system has no consistency.
I would prefer a system that allowed a bit more biff but if you gave me the choice of a system that allowed no biff but was fully consistent and a system that allowed biff but was completely inconsistent I'd take the first option every time as would anyone with any sort of understanding of the game.
The current AFL systems if the first system in my entire lifetime that is predictable, consistent and the same for everyone.
It's the only way to go.
Yeah sure, allow more biff, but keep the same consistency that the current AFL system has.
The only people that think the AFL system isn't consistent have made no study of the system. Ive succesfully predicted the amount of weeks every person who has been reported in the AFL that has been on a serious charge within a week. Would love that sort of consistency with the SANFL, not even close though, might as well as through a die.

How much does the points system depend on the number of cameras viewed to make decisions on how many points are given? The only stumbling point I can see is, does it rely on the cameras too much to use in the SANFL. If the case may be, that is.

Very good point, one I hadn't considered but would be a big factor.

[spell_check]

Now in casting my vote, I can't believe how many people have voted that it's a joke. Isn't part of what we like about the comp is that there is still abit of biff and bash, hard contact and not over umpired concerning ticky touch, touch someone in the back bulls__t? I'll admit that I've been suprised that some have got off and some have been suspended but surely it's not that bad.

It's got nothing to do with liking a bit of bash, its got everything to do with being consistent.
The AFL system is extremely consistent and everyone knows exactly what sort of penalty every player will get for every incident (with half a bit of knowledge).
The SANFL system has no consistency.
I would prefer a system that allowed a bit more biff but if you gave me the choice of a system that allowed no biff but was fully consistent and a system that allowed biff but was completely inconsistent I'd take the first option every time as would anyone with any sort of understanding of the game.
The current AFL systems if the first system in my entire lifetime that is predictable, consistent and the same for everyone.
It's the only way to go.
Yeah sure, allow more biff, but keep the same consistency that the current AFL system has.
The only people that think the AFL system isn't consistent have made no study of the system. Ive succesfully predicted the amount of weeks every person who has been reported in the AFL that has been on a serious charge within a week. Would love that sort of consistency with the SANFL, not even close though, might as well as through a die.

How much does the points system depend on the number of cameras viewed to make decisions on how many points are given? The only stumbling point I can see is, does it rely on the cameras too much to use in the SANFL. If the case may be, that is.

Very good point, one I hadn't considered but would be a big factor.

The points system is quite fair, and I reakon there has been a lot less grumbles about the tribunal since it came in, too. So if it is not really reliant on cameras, then it should be done here.