Jimmy Bartel slams 'diabolical' Zak Butters tribunal saga ultimately decided by juror's bizarre car incident
Updated . First published at
Geelong champion Jimmy Bartel has slammed the AFL's tribunal, calling for the league to overhaul the "diabolical" system.
Port Adelaide successfully appealed Zak Butters' guilty verdict on Monday night at the tribunal after juror Jason Johnson's conduct was argued to have been an error of law.
In a bizarre appeal hearing, Port's lawyer Paul Ehrlich KC had claimed that Johnson's decision to move from his office to car during the tribunal hearing last week was a "miscarriage of justice".
READ MORE: Dragons rip 'fabricated' report as shock Young rift revealed
READ MORE: Ex captain lashes Carlton after Hollands admitted to hospital
READ MORE: Bolt's sage advice for Gout Gout after record win
Zak Butters leads the team off after the loss. AFL Photos via Getty Images
Johnson is a real estate agent who had to drive to a house inspection.
Ehrlich's submission during the appeal was also interrupted by his own dog's barking and at one stage he had to put himself on mute and turn off his camera.
That interruption didn't hurt Butters, who no longer has to pay a $1500 fine that came from a guilty verdict for umpire abuse.
Butters was accused of saying to umpire Nick Foot "how much are they paying you?" after a free kick went against Port during the side's loss to St Kilda in round five.
The Power star had argued at the tribunal that he said "surely that's not a free kick?" and doubled down when speaking to reporters after the hearing.
Captain Zak Butters was shocked at the report of abusive language. Twitter
"I stand by knowing what I said and what I didn't say, especially what I didn't say," he said.
Johnson's conduct was the premise of the appeal, not what Butters was alleged to have said.
Bartel can't understand how the tribunal has gotten to this point, where a case is ultimately decided by a member getting in his car and losing signal.
"We've seen (AFL head of football) Greg Swann act pretty swiftly. If they're not at least cracking a window down there and getting some fresh air into that room and actually have a good look at each other," Bartel told Nine's Footy Classified.
"It's become so comical and diabolical, the tribunal situation. (Butters) didn't clear his name at all. He got off on a technicality. It's a shambles.
"The appeals board was going to pass the buck again, but they were under instruction to make a decision.
"If you go back to the start, it took them 24 hours to get an answer of why they gave him the fine initially because the chair of the tribunal had to be somewhere else.
"We've got one of the tribunal members going to an open house inspection and then we actually have somebody arguing the case against that and their dog starts barking in the middle of the tribunal."
Jimmy Bartel on Footy Classified. Nine
Footy Classified is now available as a podcast! Subscribe/follow via Apple, Spotify or Google Podcasts
Ehrlich submitted evidence from Google Maps that Johnson's drive would have taken at least 20-25 minutes. The AFL's counsel Albert Dinelli claimed it would have been 12.
Dinelli also argued that Johnson's change of location did not amount to an error of law.
"The panel will be very careful to consider the actual circumstances and whether or not there has actually been an error of law," he said.
In the appeals board's reasoning it was ruled that the tribunal misconducted itself and denied Butters a fair hearing due to Johnson's conduct.
However, it did state the charge of umpire abuse would not be dismissed but should go to a retrial.
The AFL opted not to choose that option.
