STRETCHER RULE

[Mickyj]

Wedgie, if that happened to a North player, we wouldn't need to jump the fence, as North players would've done something about it- unlike the weak Eagles, who don't know how to "fly the flag"...

Umm PR Lindsey went in and made himself known to the norwood player.

What, he slipped him his phone number? I certainly didn't see any serious knuckle...

LOL at PR

[spell_check]

Wedgie, if that happened to a North player, we wouldn't need to jump the fence, as North players would've done something about it- unlike the weak Eagles, who don't know how to "fly the flag"...

Umm PR Lindsey went in and made himself known to the norwood player.

What, he slipped him his phone number? I certainly didn't see any serious knuckle...

And risk having a free kick against you for "flying the flag" at an important stage of the match? It was in the half back line where it happened, and a goal can easily be set up from being too aggressive (which is what can happen when push comes to shove to slaps to face to free kicks)

[Grand Central]

Regardless of what transpires later in the game, no player has the right to interfere with another player who is in the hands of trainers. It's irrelevant.

McKenzie was in the hands of trainers, one was holding his arm as he struggled to get to his feet, when the Norwood player shoved him in the shoulder. He fell over as a result of the shove and his grogginess. Further injury could have occured.

Under no circumstances should any contact be made at all.

[Wedgie]

Regardless of what transpires later in the game, no player has the right to interfere with another player who is in the hands of trainers. It's irrelevant.

McKenzie was in the hands of trainers, one was holding his arm as he struggled to get to his feet, when the Norwood player shoved him in the shoulder. He fell over as a result of the shove and his grogginess. Further injury could have occured.

Under no circumstances should any contact be made at all.

Agreed, as I said, I laughed at the time but looking back on the incident in retrospect its a huge can of worms as far as not only further injuring a player but a possible court case down the track and definately a no-no, something I've never seen before and hope to never see again.

[Macca19]

I think he came back on through lack of other options. One guy on the bench had a stuffed ankle/leg and wouldnt have been able to come back on. So they either had to put Mckenzie back on or play with 17 players for however long until one of the bleeders could get cleaned up. This im pretty sure is breaking the rules.

As for the shove...I dont think its reportable but its against the spirit of the game. Im sure the Eagles players will remember that for next time

[Punk Rooster]

When has it ever been illegal to field 17 players??? 14 is the minimum required- anything under that, the team must forfeit. I played in an U17's match, where I copped a corky to the knee- I couldn't go off, as we only had 14 players, so I was moved to FFWD (we were getting belted). One of our players got serious;y injured, the game was called to a halt because we'd of only had 13 on the field (or if the minimum is 15, we ended up with 14 etc...)
I think the club would rather field 17 players & lose a game, than be on the recieving end of court action, if a player suffered permanent brain damage etc...

[Punk Rooster]

I would think the fine for breaking the Stretcher Rule, would take precedence over anything else.

[drebin]

Regardless of what transpires later in the game, no player has the right to interfere with another player who is in the hands of trainers. It's irrelevant.

McKenzie was in the hands of trainers, one was holding his arm as he struggled to get to his feet, when the Norwood player shoved him in the shoulder. He fell over as a result of the shove and his grogginess. Further injury could have occured.

Under no circumstances should any contact be made at all.

Well said GC - it was a gutless act and I can't believe that it went unpunished by the umpires.

[Macca19]

When has it ever been illegal to field 17 players???

It isnt. It is illegal to bring on a stretchered player 2 minutes after hes been stretchered off. I think WWT just didnt want to play a man short for a few minutes. In the meantime, it looks like they broke the rules.

[topsywaldron]

Given that DeJongh is a John Wynne protege no one should be surprised by anything he does. For his next trick he'll be going the knuckle on Jars in the coaches box at Prospect.

[purch]

22.3.3 - Replacement Player

"A player directed to leave the playing surface may be replaced by another player listed on the Team Sheet.

may be replaced. It doesn't say they have to be replaced

I would be interested to know whether the WWT FC has anything in their 'constitution' regarding "Duty of Care" to the playing personnel. No doubt in was a courageous act on behalf of the player in question, but I could just about sense the biting of medico's lips as he returned to the field and went straight into the thick of it at a crucial time in the game. The Eagles took a HUGE risk allowing this to happen.

[dinglinga]

well the so called gurus on 5aa had no idea ... some1 rang up regarding this issue.....

be interesting to see the SANFL having to make a decision if WWT is found guilty of a player allowed back on the ground after being stretchered off within 20 minutes.

[Mickyj]

well the so called gurus on 5aa had no idea ... some1 rang up regarding this issue.....

be interesting to see the SANFL having to make a decision if WWT is found guilty of a player allowed back on the ground after being stretchered off within 20 minutes.

Plus how will the SANFL handle the umpire seen waving him back onto the field , now dont say he didnt because I saw him doing it !!

[dinglinga]

maybe the question is :- who controls and is in charge of the interchange area.... the match steward!!!

[Wedgie]

Although not there I would have imagined that with the player coming off with the blood rule the umpire would have been waiving to the bench to indicate someone should come on, I'm sure he didn't specifically choose the bloke who had gone off on a stretcher.
The umpires always do that when a player isn't ready to come straight back on to replace someone taken off on the blood rule.
Communication should have been made to the umpire by the Eagles indicating that the only player that was there had just come off on a stretcher and that he wasn't eligible to come back on and the Eagles should have continued for the time being with 17 men on the ground.
As it turned out the Eagles probably thought they could get away with it or their officials on the bench had no idea if this was the case.

[PhilH]

From what I read of the rules

The INTERCHANGE STEWARD has authority over INTERCHANGES

The UMPIRE has authority over BLOOD RULES.
(There is not one mention of Interchange Stewart in the entire blood rule section)

so

If Mackenzie came back on as a NORMAL INTERCHANGE then its a black and white clear breach by the Eagles.

However

Mackenzie came onto the field under the BLOOD RULE

and by reading Law 22 A "substitution" relating to a BLOOD RULE does not need to follow the Normal Interchange Laws.

Under Law 22 all Mackenzie needed to do to be eligable to come on was be on the team list .... this he most certainly was.

So the Eagles have a defence of sorts but's it's all pretty grey & murky for mine

Then again the murkier the situation the less likely a serious penalty will be incurred.

[Mickyj]

There was a post on Footy SA that said the stretcher rule was not the same in the SANFL as the aFL the player doesnt need to wait the 20minute period .

Well Im confused I will just have to wait for the SANFL to do something.

[Punk Rooster]

There was a post on Footy SA that said the stretcher rule was not the same in the SANFL as the aFL the player doesnt need to wait the 20minute period .

Well Im confused I will just have to wait for the SANFL to do something.

If that's the case, then the Eagles are extremely negligent for allowing a concussed player on- then again, there's no mention of McKenzie being concussed, & not susprisingly so.

[ca]

From what I read of the rules

The INTERCHANGE STEWARD has authority over INTERCHANGES

The UMPIRE has authority over BLOOD RULES.
(There is not one mention of Interchange Stewart in the entire blood rule section)

so

If Mackenzie came back on as a NORMAL INTERCHANGE then its a black and white clear breach by the Eagles.

However

Mackenzie came onto the field under the BLOOD RULE

and by reading Law 22 A "substitution" relating to a BLOOD RULE does not need to follow the Normal Interchange Laws.

Under Law 22 all Mackenzie needed to do to be eligable to come on was be on the team list .... this he most certainly was.

So the Eagles have a defence of sorts but's it's all pretty grey & murky for mine

Then again the murkier the situation the less likely a serious penalty will be incurred.

Unfortunatly for me it looks like I am trying to get Norwood the points but as I have said before I don't beleive we deserve them. Plus the SANFL would not be prepared to take it on even if there was a clear breach in rules. Having said that Phil I don't really see the defence in that. Personally I think they broke the rules and should be fined with all clubs put on notice. The umpire was irrelevant he was just waving to bring on a player, the Eagles officials should have cleared it first there mistake they pay the price.

As I have said befre two other things that need to be cleared up is the safety of the player, there needs to be serious questions asked and secondly the rules on use of the stretcher so its not used as an opportunity for teams to regroup and set up plays.

[MightyEagles]

If the Interchange Steward is in charge of the Interchange, why didn't they say 'Hay, hang on, he has just come off the ground on a stretcher, he can't go on for another 20 mins'. It looks to me that the Steward wasn't paying attention to what had been going on at that time.