are the SANFL ...a bit precious..??

In the aftermath of the fiasco that was this years SANFL Preliminary final we now see that a total of 4 Woodville West Torrens players and officials have been fined and sanctioned for making inappropriate comments about the SANFL .
Having failed in their appeal to have the questionable five-point preliminary final loss to North Adelaide overturned, the Eagles had Seb Guilhaus banned for three matches next season after he took aim at the league and umpires in an explosive tirade on Facebook, accusing them of cheating.
Now, board member Sean Connors and two of Guilhaus’s teammates, Nick Hayes and Joe Sinor, have been handed fines for derogatory comments they made on social media following the preliminary final fiasco when the Roosters had 19 players on the field for three minutes at the start of the final quarter.
This also comes a few days after the league CEO urged SANFL clubs not to publicly criticize the current State Government after it slashed the previous Governments plan to fund SANFL clubs in the construction of Women's change room facilities.

Talk about the thought police!- is this Cold war Russia?? Big brother has spoken!
The Prelim final debacle was caused ultimately by the SANFLS ignorance and its inability to bring the rules into the 21st century. For the league not to be able to accept criticism of its inadequacies and then become to become precious about its image is unbelievable. If only the league spent more time and effort in running the game properly instead of "protecting the brand" we'd all be better off.
I realize that players and officials are bound by various social media policies but in the emotive aftermath of the game, where it seemed everyone in the nation had an opinion in the media ,surely these people should be excused.
If what happened to WWT happened to my club- bereft of Premierships since 1964 - the league wouldnt have to worry about social media!!- that would be the least of their worries-!!!!!
Then for the league to take a political position in the change room debacle is absolutely ridiculous. I guess it couldnt possibly have anything to do with the fact the SANFL Chairman and the State President of the Liberal party are the same person..?

Well said Blueandwhite. I would have thought the SANFL would have strongly queried the changeroom policy reversal.
The suspensions are very quick coming but where is the review into the Eagles compo or where is the review into updating the 19th man situation.

On a number of occasions, I have attempted to post on the Advertiser football pages asking where is the SANFL review/investigation of how the 19th man incident came about, and what was the involvement of the match day officials. None of my posts got published. I'm beginning to think that there is a little bit of censoring going on.

Seems to me after a friend posted on my Facebook what was said in the advertiser . This is what I think .
Seb is the major scapgoat whatever he said on social media
Board member fined $1250
And two of Sebs team mates fined and the fine suspended.

IMHO Seb is carrying the entire burden .
IMHO the SANFL publicly can't say they messed up due to the big revenue they've collected due to North winning the flag .
End of the day the SANFL can be seen as a  toothless tiger ( no offence meant glenleg).
My understanding the SANFL legal team is meeting again with the Eagles legal team .

Now that I've read the entire article thanks to someone's Facebook page .
I guess the Eagles President is correct there are rules you accept the ruling and move on .

Totally agree Blueandwhite. The SANFL is being way too precious, it was their stuff up and they shouldn't insist that no-one is allowed to criticise either the process or result.

Is anyone aware of any rule amendments being considered by the sanfl as a result of this incident?

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:Is anyone aware of any rule amendments being considered by the sanfl as a result of this incident?

yep, they've ordered bigger brooms & bigger carpets

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:Is anyone aware of any rule amendments being considered by the sanfl as a result of this incident?

I suspect rule no.1 in this link will cover it...still, a team can still score even more than 8 points i.e. multiple behinds, then a goal, and get away with it

http://sanfl.com.au/news/2018/11/12/2019-sanfl-rule-changes/

Incidentally, no.5 covers a long time bug bear of mine