SA Footy

Does the SANFL use the same rule as the AFL regarding to a player that has been carried off on a Stretcher must stay off the ground for 20 minutes.

Today in the Eagles v Norwood game Mark McKenzie was stretchered off after a heavy knock. He was checked out by the doctor and was given the all clear and returned to the field basically straight away. The TV coverage believed this was not allowed, does anyone know if the SANFL uses this rule or not?

Another side note to this was that according to the TV he did not come of through the Interchange gate. Considering it was right infront of the benches I do not believe that part of it.

I don't know what the stretcher rule is, but I always thought a person on a stretcher could leave the field at any point on the ground, not just the interchange bench.

Yes, the SANFL do use that rule.

A player doesn't have to come off through the interchange gates, but if they dont, they cant come back on the ground.

PUNTER wrote:Does the SANFL use the same rule as the AFL regarding to a player that has been carried off on a Stretcher must stay off the ground for 20 minutes.

Today in the Eagles v Norwood game Mark McKenzie was stretchered off after a heavy knock. He was checked out by the doctor and was given the all clear and returned to the field basically straight away. The TV coverage believed this was not allowed, does anyone know if the SANFL uses this rule or not?

Another side note to this was that according to the TV he did not come of through the Interchange gate. Considering it was right infront of the benches I do not believe that part of it.

It appeared that the umpire waved him back onto the ground Punter when the player went off with the second Blood rule which happened in like 2 minutes!! Does anyone know if the norwood player who attacked maca when he tried to stand up will get citied by video there was no need to have another go at a player who had trouble standing,how he managed to run back onto the ground is beyond me.
Perhaps the umpire and interchange officals need to please explain.

1) Last year, Nick Kurzel came off the ground, didn't go through the interchange gate, & was not allowed back on for the rest of the game- he got dropped to the reserves for this error the following week.

2) There is no trial by video in the SANFL- not all games are covered by camers, so I believe that is the reason (ie can't be consistent)

Punk
All league games are taped - either by the ABC or Pine studios who the league has contracted. Unsure as to being cited from the tape though.

I believe coming off the ground on a stretcher is classed as going through the interchange - eg going straight down the race at Adelaide Oval then coming back to the bench is deemed OK. Not 100% sure but believe that to be the ruling.

As i'm uncertain these comments are personal
Col D

1 & 1/2 out of 2 for me then. There is no trial by video in the SANFL though.

I wouldn't bet on my comments Punk - I think I'm correct but not totally certain - except on the taping of games.
Col D

I believe action should be taken against the eagles for the McKenzie farce for one of two reasons

1) Using the stretcher as a tactic, sets a dangerous precedent.

2) Letting a player go back on when concussed only moment earlier

It has to be one of the two, he was either concused or he wasn't. He certainly looked it so very dangerous to let him go back out there. The whole event made a few of the Eagles fans around me feel a bit stupid after crying out for 25 when Dejong pushed him. Sure it should have been paid if he didn't turn back out on the ground within minutes, Dejong had every reason to push him if he was faking it.

no loss of points just a reprimand and clarification of the rules is needed.

I was watching on the ABC and the commentators even remarked when he came off that he couldn't come back on for the rest of the game.
They also mentioned that a steward told him he couldn't come back on but the Eagles officials ignored the steward.
They also mentioned the likely punishment would be a fine, personally I think it should be counted as a forfeit (maybe depending on if the steward story the ABC gave is true or not).

If thats the cae tt would be to bigger issue for the SANFL to take on so nothing will happen. Surly they know the rules.

Refer my post on Legs v Eagles scores for a full text of the rules.

Crux is

Player being stretchered off must go direct to change rooms (ie NOT through i/change gates)

Player being stretchered off CAN come back on provided
- 20 minutes of game time has passed (ie not including end of quarter breaks)
- he is physically up to it.

Interchance stewart is reponsible for lodging a report if the rules were broken

Its up to the controlling body (SANFL) to decide a punishment.

Not punishment is specified in the rules (but fines and match results reversals are mentioned as options for OTHER interchange infingments)


I was not there but listening to RPH I can't believe that 20 mins passed.
I'm not even sure Mackenzie went to changerooms first
So from afar it looks like a breach occurred and Eagles are in trouble of some sort.

Stay tuned for an interesting week for Glen Rosser.

What did concern me was the Norwood bloke pushing McKenzie over when he was clearly under the care of trainers. Reportable in my book.

Grand Central wrote:What did concern me was the Norwood bloke pushing McKenzie over when he was clearly under the care of trainers. Reportable in my book.

I saw that and had a giggle but agree it was a bit below the belt.

Wedgie wrote:

Grand Central wrote:What did concern me was the Norwood bloke pushing McKenzie over when he was clearly under the care of trainers. Reportable in my book.

I saw that and had a giggle but agree it was a bit below the belt.

Now that umpire stood there and did nothing except have a word with Lindsey for coming in and pushing the norwood guy back.In fact he didnt move the player who took the kick off the line when he could see there was an injury problem and mackenzie wasnt moving.!!

Looks like I am umpire bashing lol

PhilH wrote:Refer my post on Legs v Eagles scores for a full text of the rules.

Crux is

Player being stretchered off must go direct to change rooms (ie NOT through i/change gates)

Player being stretchered off CAN come back on provided
- 20 minutes of game time has passed (ie not including end of quarter breaks)
- he is physically up to it.

Interchance stewart is reponsible for lodging a report if the rules were broken

Its up to the controlling body (SANFL) to decide a punishment.

Not punishment is specified in the rules (but fines and match results reversals are mentioned as options for OTHER interchange infingments)


I was not there but listening to RPH I can't believe that 20 mins passed.
I'm not even sure Mackenzie went to changerooms first
So from afar it looks like a breach occurred and Eagles are in trouble of some sort.

Stay tuned for an interesting week for Glen Rosser.

thinking about it Philh, it could be said that maca was heading for the change rooms(walking that way) when the umpire waved him onto or into the field of play!!

Personal Viewpoint

Given that the umpires had sent 2 Eagles players off at the same time re the bloodrule and wanting to keep the game going -thus needing to get 2 off the interchange and back on the field with one on the bench receiving treatment and trying to get 2 interchanges recorded with the steward and players being called on to the field it would have been very chaotic!

Seems that the rule may need to be clarified but also what happens when you have players forced from the field by the umpires following the bloodrule? Surely we wouldn't expect a team to play one or two short - how long can the game be stopped for with bloodrules? If the situation re the 20 minutes is in place do the umps call a halt to the game for 20 minutes if you dont have anyone else who can go on ?

Phil can you help with any further info re delays caused by bloodrules?

Col D

We discussed this one for a while on today's show and felt it may be time for a refresher course for all officials of all clubs about these sorts of things. While a protest/stripping of points would not be cricket (to mix metaphors!), it is a concern this occurred. I don't think any team would want to "win" a game on a technicality (I'm not sure how highly Brock views his Bathurst '87 win, when the Sierras were disqualified), so I hope this isn't even considered but it DOES need to be addressed fairly quickly.

Mickyj wrote:

Wedgie wrote:

Grand Central wrote:What did concern me was the Norwood bloke pushing McKenzie over when he was clearly under the care of trainers. Reportable in my book.

I saw that and had a giggle but agree it was a bit below the belt.

Now that umpire stood there and did nothing except have a word with Lindsey for coming in and pushing the norwood guy back.In fact he didnt move the player who took the kick off the line when he could see there was an injury problem and mackenzie wasnt moving.!!

Looks like I am umpire bashing lol

Well the retaliator always cops it, no question.

Try this CD

22 INFECTIOUS DISEASES

22.3 ACTIVE BLEEDING - ROLE OF UMPIRE

22.3.3 - Replacement Player

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

A replacement player may enter the Playing Surface while the player that he of she is replacing is leaving the playing surface.

If a replacement player has not entered the Playing Surface by the time the directed Player has not entered the Playing Surface by the time the directed Player has left the Playing Surface the field Umpire must recommence play immediately."


So playing Eagles advocate for a second (take notes CD..)

By definition of this Blood Rule (Law 22) has preecendence over the Interchange Rule (Law 7)
ie Law 7 says playing cannot come onto field UNTIL player coming off is through interchange gates. Law 22 says as above can enter before player leaves. (indeed they must or else umpire will continue play)

So if Law 22 has preecedence over Law 7 re the timing of interchange does it also have preceedence over the rest of Law 7 re the stretcher.


Ie you kept to Law 22 but broke Law 7 ... then again anytime Law 22 is invoked Law 7 is always broken.