Port Adelaide superstar Zak Butters has sensationally had his umpire abuse case thrown out after the appeals board dismissed the tribunal’s original charge.
The verdict puts an end to an eight-day saga that has dominated headlines since Butters allegedly said, “How much are they paying you?” to umpire Nick Foot during the Power’s 14-point loss to St Kilda.
Butters vehemently denied that comment, insisting he said: “Surely that’s not a free kick,” but he will be forced to pay a $1500 fine.
Know the news with the 7NEWS app: Download today
But in the end, none of that mattered as the the conduct of tribunal member Jason Johnson ultimately amounted to an error of law and got the case thrown out.
At Monday’s appeal hearing, Port Adelaide argued that Johnson listening to part of the tribunal while driving his car constitutes a “miscarriage of justice”.
During last week’s tribunal hearing, Johnson dropped off the call briefly as he transferred from his laptop to his car to attend a prior commitment.
Tribunal chair Renee Enborn KC had also set a deadline for the end of the hearing, which meant they didn’t disclose the reasons for their guilty verdict until the following day.
But Port Adelaide legal counsel Paul Ehrlich KC centered their argument on Johnson, who was “driving during the final submissions and also deliberations”.
“It was inexplicable and amounted to a miscarriage of justice. It was conduct that ought to be disclosed and wasn’t disclosed,” Ehrlich argued.
“This was not a mere change in platform … it is to be inferred his mind was elsewhere through final submissions because he was conscious he had to leave or be late for his open inspection.
“Whether Johnson heard all the deliberations or not, the fact of the matter is he could not have been properly considering while he was driving a motor vehicle.”
In a funny sidenote, Ehrlich apologised for his dogs barking in the background while making his submissions.
Arguing for the AFL, Albert Dinelli KC said that while Johnson’s actions were regrettable, he was only disconnected for one minute and 22 seconds.
“It not clear if anything was missed … that (period of time) alone could not rise to the standard that is being described,” he said.
“It was a minor lapse and not one that could be described as serious.
“It is not said that he was not paying attention at all, albeit driving for part of the submissions and present for the deliberations.”
The appeals board, made up of Will Houghton (Chair), Stephen Jurica and Richard Loveridge, took just under 30 minutes to make their decision.
They offered a re-hearing, but the AFL had earlier confirmed they will not seek a re-trial, so Butters is in the clear on a technicality.
The AFL released a statement shortly after the verdict.
“The AFL apologises for the inconvenience caused to the parties for the error of law that has led to this outcome, in particular Zak Butters, Ollie Wines and Ben Rutten of the Port Adelaide Football Club and AFL umpire Nick Foot,” they said.
“The AFL reiterates its strong support for the AFL tribunal and all of those who make an important contribution to the conduct of the AFL disciplinary system, including former players who lend an important perspective to these matters. The AFL also expresses its strong support for umpires at all levels and the vital role they play in our sport.
“The AFL will now reflect on the reasons of the appeal board and learnings from tonight’s outcome.”
Last week, the tribunal said they were “satisfied to the requisite standard” Butters had made the offending comment.
“It is implausible that Mr Foot would invent the offending comment,” the tribunal’s judgment said.
“It was put to him that there were several distractions and that he had misheard what Mr Butters said. We also consider that to be implausible.”
Butters vehemently denied that comment, insisting he said: “Surely that’s not a free kick.”
The flashpoint came when Foot paid a free kick to St Kilda’s Mitch Owens, prompting Port’s Ollie Wines and Butters to protest.
“The comment that Butters made to me was ‘How much are they paying you?’” Foot told the tribunal.
“It questioned my integrity. I’m 100 per cent adamant that those are the words Zak Butters said to me.”
But Butters said he was “100 per cent sure” he did not make that remark.
– With AAP
