Research Project
Researchers: John Zeleznikow (Managed by) , Mr Andrew Vincent , Mr Brendon Stewart , Prof. John Zeleznikow (Managed by)
Brief description In September 2006, Prof. John Zeleznikow, Andrew Vincent and Brendon Stewart received a grant from the Australian Football league Research Board to undertake this project. The goal of the project was to examine issue of consistency and fairness in sporting tribunal decision-making. A more difficult issue is the role of consistency of decision-making and whether fairness automatically includes consistency given that each human event is unique in its facts. Should like be treated the same as (nearly) like or should each event be treated without reference to any other event? The AFL clearly wanted to increase consistency in the new system. (See ‘set of principles’ in AFL Tribunals Reforms 2005) yet does not accept the legal principle of precedent (the principle that the results of previous similar cases should influence or even direct the result of the instant case). This reflects the even present conflict in judicial or quasi-judicial decision-making between flexibility and predictability. This project was conducted in 2006. For the 2005 season, the Australian Football League (AFL) overhauled its system of determining penalties for significant player infringements during a match. It introduced a Match Review Panel which was responsible for assessing and classifying incidents from all AFL matches. Whilst umpires could still report players, the match review panel was established to review the videos of each game . A pre-defined set of points was given for each infringement. Players with prior poor records (viewed as an aggravating factor) receive an increased penalty, while those who accept the view of the Match Review Panel (and the case is not heard by the Tribunal) receive a reduced penalty. Project Organization Unit: School of Management and Information Systems, Victoria University