Brisbane Men’s & Boys’ Hockey
Hockey - A Game for Life!
BHA Judiciary Outcomes - 2009
Brisbane Hockey Association Inc
PO Box 503
MORNINGSIDE Q 4170
Australia
Tel: +61 7 38994399
Fax: +61 7 3399 9825
Judiciary Outcomes
For some years BHA Judiciary Committee Hearing outcomes have been published on the BHA Website. It is thought that by doing so, players, officials and supporters can gain a better understanding of the consequences of unacceptable behaviour. Players' and officials' names and the names of the Clubs involved in each Hearing have been removed. The selection of outcomes listed here span several years. Click on a heading to read more . . .
These outcomes should also be read in conjuntion with the BHA By-laws, Part F - Judiciary Committee Rules (see links below).
Documents
Aust Sports Comm, Code of Behaviour (PDF)
BHA Inc By-laws, Part F - Judiciary Committee Rules (PDF)
BHA Inc By-laws, Part G - Appeals Committee Rules (PDF)
Definition
Often the Judiciary Panel will impose a sentence that concists of a number of weeks suspension and/or a number of weeks suspension 'suspended'. What this means for the Defendant is that any weeks of his suspension that have in turn been 'suspended' are held over as a form of 'good behaviour bond'. The Panel will specify a period for the 'suspended' part of any suspension.
Should the Defendant be called before the Judiciary Panel on a similar charge during the period specified, and is found guilty of the new charge, then the weeks held in suspension will automatically be imposed on the Defendant. The Defendant will then be liable for any additional supension imposed by the new Panel as a result of the guilty verdict.
09/3(b) Referral from Judiciary Panel - Striking Opponent with Stick |
| Posted by Administrator (admin) on 11-08-2009 |
Following a recommendation to the BHA Board of Management by the Judiciary Panel hearing 09/3(a), a player was requested to appear before a new Panel to answer a charge of 'Striking Opponent with Stick'.After considering all of the evidence presented by the witnesses and the player, the Panel found that there was sufficient evidence to suggest that the player did indeed strike the player in the head with his stick.
Despite the relatively low intensity of the blow and even considering that the player may have been provoked, the Panel deems this a very serious incident and were concerned that the player's versions of events differed from other witnesses. In light of this the Panel found that the player should be suspended for the minimum period stipulated for 'striking' in the BHA By-laws, and a sentence of six weeks suspension from all matches, with two weeks of that being suspended, was an appropriate sentence for the player.