The AFL Tribunal has found Port Adelaide acting captain Zak Butters guilty of abusive language toward umpire Nick Foot, fining him $1,500 after a two-hour hearing on Tuesday afternoon.
Here's what to know.
Context
The charge stems from an incident during Port Adelaide's Gather Round loss to St Kilda on Sunday night. After a free kick was awarded against Port ruckman Jordon Sweet, Butters approached Foot to question the call.
Foot alleges the midfielder said "how much are they paying you?", which he interpreted as an accusation that St Kilda was paying him. Butters insists he said, "Surely that's not a free kick."
Foot immediately awarded a 50-metre penalty and reported him on the spot. The exchange was not captured on the umpire's microphone.
What happened
The case came down to one person's word against another. Foot, who has never reported a player for abusive language in his 15-year umpiring career, was unwavering. Butters was equally firm, and teammate Ollie Wines, who was standing beside him at the time of the incident, backed his account.
The three-person panel sided with the umpire after 25 minutes of deliberation.
The AFL's case leaned heavily on inconsistencies in Butters' version of what he said. In a post-match interview with Channel 7, the midfielder said he had asked, "How is that a free kick?" At the tribunal, he recalled saying, "Surely that's not a free kick."
Your contribution ensures The Daily Aus can continue doing the work you love.
I want to give $10 monthly to help TDA keep doing the news.
Your details:
Port Adelaide argued the inconsistencies were irrelevant and that Butters was clear on what he did not say.
The response
Butters spoke outside Port Adelaide headquarters after the hearing. He said: "I stand by knowing what I said and what I didn't say. Especially what I didn't say."
Port Adelaide CEO Matthew Richardson said that the club "rejects any suggestion that questions Zak's integrity" and "stands unequivocally" behind its acting captain.
AFL Players' Association CEO James Gallagher called the verdict "deeply concerning," arguing the matter "should have been resolved in the aftermath of the match, not referred to the Tribunal."
Two issues have dominated the post-hearing media debate. The first is the missing microphone audio, which Port Adelaide's legal defence called a "glaring hole in the evidence."
The second is the revelation that Foot works for betting company Sportsbet as a horse racing analyst. Commentator Gerard Whateley was direct on AFL 360, saying Foot should step away from Sportsbet immediately because "his status in the game is vital as a grand final umpire."
What’s next?
Port Adelaide is awaiting the panel's written reasons on Wednesday before deciding whether to formally lodge an appeal, which would cost the club $10,000.
