Balmain Players Walk Out of Match v Wests - Match Abandoned

[Pekay]

All players eligible for selection attended training this week as per normal. Those players who walked were asked to keep away from the club for this week. The playing group conducted their own meeting last night after training (away from the board and club) to host a discussion around the situation.

Were there any suspensions imposed by the league? Nothing in the Tribunal section..

[Northern_Swan]

Interesting read.

As an outsider, I have one point to make. AFL Sydney has the power to approve or decline a name change and playing location for any of its affiliate clubs. It is my understanding that Wests Magpies have applied to be known as Sydney Magpies for a number of years and been declined. Why does the Dockers management assume that a change to Coogee and the Sydney Dockers moniker is a foregone conclusion? Is there more going on behind the scenes that the "Tiger faithful" don't know about?

[radar oreilly]

Players that walked off suspended. Not sure if sydney afl or club ban. Their div 2 side has forfeited this week not sure about the prems.

[ShortHalfHead]

27. (a) A ?Special or General Meeting? can be called by a minimum of five (5) Full Members with

twenty one (21) days notice to the membership through the Secretary. The agenda and motions to be

presented to the membership and no other topic or motion can be ?put? at such meeting other than

that presented to the membership for resolution.

[zik]

Were there any suspensions imposed by the league? Nothing in the Tribunal section..

From what we were told players that walked were free to play this weekend as the tribunal hearing isn't until next Wednesday night. However this sydney AFL ruling was overruled by AFL NSW/ACT.

[mountainsofpain]

Come on you guys, you need to learn the interwebs a bit better!!!!

Committee

Club Consitution

Yeah, things just don't disappear from the interwebz.

Say hello to 26th July everyone:
Welcome to the Balmain Dockers

[Tiges]

27. (a) A ?Special or General Meeting? can be called by a minimum of five (5) Full Members with

twenty one (21) days notice to the membership through the Secretary. The agenda and motions to be

presented to the membership and no other topic or motion can be ?put? at such meeting other than

that presented to the membership for resolution.

Was ignored for greater than the 21day period and then refused by the board in writing because apparently only directors have the right to stand down directors. That is absolute rubbish, and one to take to the authorities I imagine.

[Norris Lurker]

Players that walked off suspended. Not sure if sydney afl or club ban. Their div 2 side has forfeited this week not sure about the prems.

Once the decision was made that the players who walked shouldn't play this week, Balmain would have to call up Div 2 players to replace them - and considering Div 2 were already playing short, a forfeit there was inevitable. It's a bugger for Camden, but unavoidable.

[Tiges]

Hi Northern Swan. There are things going on behind the scenes that we all know about, which is why this desperate move was made.

Also, for everyone, the players did not forfeit that match,they came off the field in protest of the board but were prepared to come back on and play once the AFL agreed to an investigation. No one from the AFL or the umpires spoke to the group and abandoned the match after 5 minutes.

The AFL had spoken to the group about a player rally per weekend and invited to attend the match. If they just wanted to abandon the match they wouldn't have played at all, or notified the AFL to attend.

Also, the team started the game with the appropriate number to start a match, there is no identified number of players to finish a match as far as I am aware.

- - - Updated - - -

Once the decision was made that the players who walked shouldn't play this week, Balmain would have to call up Div 2 players to replace them - and considering Div 2 were already playing short, a forfeit there was inevitable. It's a bugger for Camden, but unavoidable.

Pretty ridiculous really. Essendon players are allowed to play when there is a doping investigation, but a player rally against an administration, the players are suspended before the investigation.

As I mentioned no one from the AFL or the umpires spoke to the players and after 5 minutes called the match off.

The AFL are about as consistent as Collingwood with their zero racism policy, unless it is of course eddy mac being racist. Happy to suspend a team pending an investigation, unless of course it is an AFL team and there is money at stake!

[Norris Lurker]

Also, the team started the game with the appropriate number to start a match, there is no identified number of players to finish a match as far as I am aware.

Actually, there is. AFL Sydney By-Law 7.5.

Minimum Number of Players (Amended 23/01/2012)
7.5 The minimum number of on field players required for a team to commence a competition match shall be fourteen (14). Should a team commence with fourteen (14) or more players and subsequently have players leave the field during the match, which reduces the team to less than fourteen (14) players, the club will have fifteen (15) minutes to restore the on field numbers back to the minimum (i.e fourteen (14) players). If this cannot be achieved the match is to be stopped, scores recorded and details forwarded to the Football Operations Manager. The match will subsequently be awarded to the non-offending side as a forfeit as per By-Law 5.19.

- - - Updated - - -

I think it was 10 that walked and 12 that stayed on, maybe the other way round.
As long as the players that walked went off through the interchange area (some of them may have already been on the bench), technically the game should have gone on with Wests playing 10-12 players for the next 15 minutes - but that would have been a farce.
Of course if they didn't go off through the interchange area, there's no scope for them to return; so the game could be called off on the spot - which I think is what happened.

[Tiges]

I stand corrected, but 15 minutes was not given, and no umpire or official spoke to the group post protest, even after the AFL had been contacted that there would be a rally.

As I said the players were prepared to go back on and play once speaking with the AFL to cause an investigation. This unfortunately did not occur.

One thing is for sure though, the board will have a tough night tonight with the investigation!

[mountainsofpain]

Also, for everyone, the players did not forfeit that match,they came off the field in protest of the board but were prepared to come back on and play once the AFL agreed to an investigation. No one from the AFL or the umpires spoke to the group and abandoned the match after 5 minutes.

Maybe someone from the group should have gone and talked to the umpires/AFL then?

It probably would have also helped for the players concerned to have known what the potential ramifications of their actions would as well (regarding the forfeit).

[zik]

All players exited through the interchange area peacefully to minimize the drama.

[Norris Lurker]

You can't be too critical of the umpires. With 22 names on the team sheet, they couldn't possibly have imagined a situation where 9 players would leave the game - they may not have known what the by-laws were in that situation. The ground manager should have had a copy - but in the confusion of events out there, it may not have occurred to anyone to look up what the rules were.
In any event, it's not in the umpires' power to grant an AFL investigation.

[Tiges]

They knew the possible ramifications, however the real issue here is the dubious behaviour of the board.

It is me saying that i think it is wrong to suspend pending an investigation, when the AFL has set a precedents by allowing the Essendon Football club to play among their allegations, which are far more serious than a protest at Balmain.

Isn't it up to the umpires and officials to officiate and control the game? The players made it known about the rally to the AFL pre weekend. It is easy to identify the group of players, to speak with. Why didn't they before calling the game off?

The AFL have the power to begin an investigation, but simply didn't speak to the group, even though they knew that there was going to be some type of protest!