SA Footy

LMA wrote:

Aerie wrote:

Magellan wrote:Who was the extra player?

Jarrod Allmond

He must be going nuts

he's now a mere shell of a man

What sort of penalty Seb Guilhaus will get for publicly stating the umpiring was rigged by the SANFL?
Pretty heavy stuff possibly warranting deregistering and possibly even a law suit with that sort of defamation.

wild dog wrote:I can't understand how the SANFL is being labelled as the chief villain. The main party at fault is Norf, it is their responsibility to have the correct number of players on the field. The Eagles should have looked at the rule book and demanded the count, but the SANFL is the last of the 3 parties (or 4 if you want to include the umpires as separate) to be held responsible.

Agree SANFL have set the rules are they are in black and white. North failed to comply by having too many players on the ground. Eagles didn't follow the correct process. Play on.

It occured to me that this wont be able to happen from next year with the 666 formation. It will be picked up instantly and a free kick paid

I'd favour cacelling any scores by North in that period. It is their responsibility to get their player management right regardless of technical and procedural debate above.

Psyber wrote:I'd favour cacelling any scores by North in that period. It is their responsibility to get their player management right regardless of technical and procedural debate above.

Yep, the interchange steward obviously cheated, so did the 2 sitting on the bench, SURELY they wondered where the 3rd player was??

Psyber wrote:I'd favour cacelling any scores by North in that period. It is their responsibility to get their player management right regardless of technical and procedural debate above.

What happens if they were defending the lead and didn't/not try to score? How do you quantify that?

Senor Moto Gadili wrote:

wild dog wrote:I can't understand how the SANFL is being labelled as the chief villain. The main party at fault is Norf, it is their responsibility to have the correct number of players on the field. The Eagles should have looked at the rule book and demanded the count, but the SANFL is the last of the 3 parties (or 4 if you want to include the umpires as separate) to be held responsible.

Agree SANFL have set the rules are they are in black and white. North failed to comply by having too many players on the ground. Eagles didn't follow the correct process. Play on.

Absolutely

In light of the two sides playing in this week's game, the Grand Final is now being brought to you by Ashley Madison.
Cheers

Unless they can prove some INTENT of North to deliberately play with 19 then it is a non issue.

Psyber wrote:I'd favour cacelling any scores by North in that period. It is their responsibility to get their player management right regardless of technical and procedural debate above.

The 1.3 that North scored would have added some time on to the game and being that the Eagles scored a goal with only seconds remaining do we then discount that goal?

GMcG wrote:

Psyber wrote:I'd favour cacelling any scores by North in that period. It is their responsibility to get their player management right regardless of technical and procedural debate above.

Yep, the interchange steward obviously cheated, so did the 2 sitting on the bench, SURELY they wondered where the 3rd player was??

The two on the bench were injured werent they? May have been receiving treatment, or down in the rooms and not noticed

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Psyber wrote:I'd favour cacelling any scores by North in that period. It is their responsibility to get their player management right regardless of technical and procedural debate above.

Would be a popular choice I'd say, considering an attacking advantage for that period. Perhaps an additional scoring penalty might apply considering that there was a potential effect on the opponent's ability to score as well Food for thought.

Through a friend that was listening to the ABC this morning, I heard that the Eagles only became aware of the extra man when C7 alerted them to it. Can anyone confirm this? Not sure if it's already been mentioned.

StrayDog wrote:

Psyber wrote:I'd favour cacelling any scores by North in that period. It is their responsibility to get their player management right regardless of technical and procedural debate above.

Would be a popular choice I'd say, considering an attacking advantage for that period. Perhaps an additional scoring penalty might apply considering that there was a potential effect on the opponent's ability to score as well Food for thought.

Through a friend that was listening to the ABC this morning, I heard that the Eagles only became aware of the extra man when C7 alerted them to it. Can anyone confirm this? Not sure if it's already been mentioned.

100% not true

What if you’ve backed the Eagles, will Ubet, Sportsbet etc pay out if the result is overturned?

Half Back Flanker wrote:

StrayDog wrote:
Through a friend that was listening to the ABC this morning, I heard that the Eagles only became aware of the extra man when C7 alerted them to it. Can anyone confirm this? Not sure if it's already been mentioned.

100% not true

Thanks HBF.

For 115 minutes when it was 18 vs 18, Eagles 95 to North 92.
For 5 minutes when it was 19 vs 18, North 8 to Eagles 0.

The only solution that sits right with me, is a full replay next Sunday.

Aerie wrote:For 115 minutes when it was 18 vs 18, Eagles 95 to North 92.
For 5 minutes when it was 19 vs 18, North 8 to Eagles 0.

The only solution that sits right with me, is a full replay next Sunday.

Interesting

Aerie wrote:For 115 minutes when it was 18 vs 18, Eagles 95 to North 92.
For 5 minutes when it was 19 vs 18, North 8 to Eagles 0.

The only solution that sits right with me, is a full replay next Sunday.

Bit unfair on Norwood, making them wait three weeks between games.

Having said that I don't think either NA or WWT could complain too much if a replay was ordered.

RB wrote:

Aerie wrote:For 115 minutes when it was 18 vs 18, Eagles 95 to North 92.
For 5 minutes when it was 19 vs 18, North 8 to Eagles 0.

The only solution that sits right with me, is a full replay next Sunday.

Bit unfair on Norwood, making them wait three weeks between games.

Having said that I don't think either NA or WWT could complain too much if a replay was ordered.

A replay would be the fairest option