The Contrived Result - North Sydney thrown out of Sydney Grade Cricket Semi Finals in 1994-95
Warwick Adlam | March 10, 2023
The 1994-95 Sydney Grade Cricket Season will always be remembered by every administrator, every player and every club that played in that First-Grade finals series.
It was the season of the infamous “Contrived Result “which culminated in the North Sydney Bears being thrown out of the First-Grade finals by the SCA and then North Sydney taking the SCA to Court. This resulted in the First-Grade semi-finals being pushed back a week while both parties slugged it out at Macquarie St Courthouse.
To be right in the middle of it as a player was simply amazing to witness. Instead of going to training that week, we headed to the city to watch it all unfold. It would also be the last time the scheduling of a two-day game for the final round of the season would occur.
The points system was the same back then as it is now. 6 points for a win, 10 for an outright.
The scene was set where with one round to go North Sydney were placed in 5th spot, and within striking distance of Waverly in 4th spot who were taking on Wests in the final round and Bankstown who were in 3rd spot. But we had to win outright. The Magpies were unstoppable that season, finishing up Minor Premiers and favourites to take out the Flag.
The finals back then were top 4 only. Minor Premiers to play the 4th team on the ladder and 2nd played 3rd in semi-finals and the two winners would play the Grand Final.
Waverley had a much better quotient than the Bears so Norths needed to win the final round outright and Waverley lose to launch them into 4th spot. (Highly unlikely) The last round was a two-day game over two Saturdays and history had shown some funny business had taken place in previous seasons but nothing like this.
To add more spice to it the first day was washed out at a few grounds including the Norths v UNSW game. When the first days play was fully washed out the game on day 2 reverted to 120 overs, exactly the same as happens in the current competition. This also calmed the nerves at Waverly headquarters during the week as they thought an outright just isn’t possible in 120 overs. Being 6 points clear of Norths and with a much better quotient, even if they lost, they would be ok. How wrong they were!
We had joked during the week about an outright in 120 overs and trying to think of different scenarios to make it happen. We were up against UNSW who were going ok and sitting mid table.
We couldn’t roll them twice unless it was a complete minefield so had to come up with something left field. There were no rules back then about declarations, like there are now.
We devised a plan to offer UNSW an entertaining final day of the season. We would bat for 30 overs each, declare and then bat another 30. Sounds crazy, but we had to try something and just prayed UNSW might be interested.
Phil Marks walked out for the toss, shook hands with Jimmy Dixon and then offered up the 30 overs option. Jimmy told Skid he would need to consult his players so walked back to his team to run it by them while Skid informed the umpires on what may happen. The Umpires were completely ok with what was suggested which would become crucial evidence in court.
Jimmy came back after consulting his players and spoke to Skid for quite a while. Finally, the coin was tossed nice and high in the air. They shook hands again and Skid walked towards us. “Everyone in the sheds now”, we headed inside hoping for some good news. Skid sat us down, “Right, it’s on” They didn’t want 30 overs, but Jimmy suggested 20 overs each first up, then 40 overs each after that. Both teams go hard for the win. This was the crucial bit “both teams go hard for the win. “
We tried to get our heads around it as best we could as we walked out to bat. After 20 overs we declared at 9 for 101. UNSW then came out swinging and were all out for 99 in their 20th over. It was pretty crazy stuff from the get-go and I can’t recall the final few overs exactly but I know they were trying to get the runs. The last couple of wickets being run outs didn’t look good on the scorecard and this would be brought up later by the SCA.
Back in we go to bat for the second innings and for the first time in the day we actually thought we could pull it off. Word had also filtered back to us that Waverly were in massive trouble against Wests and likely to lose.
10 points were gettable and suddenly we felt a tinge of finals fever in the air. We then scored 194 declaring 5 down after 34 overs (we didn’t have to bat 40 overs) leaving UNSW 196 to win off 45 overs. Two- and a-bit hours later UNSW were all out for 168 in the 43rd with only 10 balls left in the day.
I remember going absolutely nuts when the final wicket was taken, 10 points to us and with the Magpies confirmed as winning, we slotted into 3rd spot; 4 points clear of Waverley and we jumped in front of Bankstown. The song was sung loud and long as we couldn’t believe what had just happened.
As we celebrated into the early morning the back-room bar at Waverly Oval was fuming (and rightly so I should add), phones started running hot between some SCA committee members. They ran even hotter the next morning when the results were published in the paper. It’s safe to say they weren’t happy and wanted an explanation.
After perusing the scores in the Sunday papers SCA committee member Brian Freedman rang the chairman Noel Laming and suggested getting both teams in and investigate what went on.
The meeting took place on the Monday night in CNSW headquarters. After questioning the captains and officials of both clubs, the committee decided it was a contrived result and no points would be awarded to either team. The next morning a fax was sent to North Sydney President Bevan White stating Norths had been stripped of their 10 points and would not contest the finals.
Waverly now back onto 4th spot, Bankstown 3rd and the Bears season over.
The rule back then was very vague and poorly written but put simply it stipulated contrived results weren’t on. We argued this was not the case as UNSW had tried to win the game. It was also argued by Norths that any declaration at all by any team over the season would mean trying to contrive a result. It didn’t matter, it was a unanimous vote by the SCA and that’s it. I must admit, I thought the match was pretty dodgy, but at the same time well within the rules. Crazy declarations had been the norm back then and at no time did UNSW lose on purpose which was suggested. If UNSW had won outright nothing would have happened.
North Sydney President Bevan White, who was one of the great figure heads in Sydney Grade Cricket of that time called us all in for a meeting on the Tuesday afternoon. Bevan was not one to push around and he wasn’t going to accept this decision without a fight. Bugger this he said, we are taking them to court. They can’t do this. We naturally replied, are you sure, to which Bevan replied “I’ve never been surer about anything in my life. He filed a letter via the courts to the SCA the next morning, I’ve no idea what it said but basically it meant we will see you in court. We had just become the “Bad News Bears “as grade cricket started making headlines in the papers for all the wrong reasons.
The semi finals had to be pushed back a week as court dates were locked in. Players holidays were cancelled and to say we weren’t popular is an understatement. But at the core of it we knew we had done nothing wrong re the rules, it just looked bloody dodgy. Bevan White sought out Chris Clancy who was the Clubs legal adviser. Chris went straight to the top and acquired the services of QC Murray Tobias. I hadn’t been to court before but to watch this bloke in action and interrogate the SCA members on the stand was brutal for them and I doubt they will ever forget him.
The court case took three or four days as each SCA committee member was called to the stand as was each captain. Phil Marks was the main target and he had to sit on the stand for at least three hours. For some reason, and I can’t remember why, no player was called to the stand.
Thankfully, I haven’t been to court since, but I’ve heard most cases are won by the lawyer. This was certainly the case here. QC Murray Tobias was unbelievable and the SCA lawyer simply wasn’t up to it. The rules as they read at the time were clearly in our favour. The judge delivered late on the Friday afternoon that SCA members had predetermined the case and ordered it be reheard by a different panel. This would mean a delay of a further week in completing the competition and the SCA decided it was not possible to take any further action. 10 points back to North Sydney and semi-finals bound in 3rd position.
At the next general meeting of the SCA a motion was passed unanimously supporting the committee in their handling of the matter. It was the rules being so vague and not clear that caused all the issues. To say it was a stressful time for all involved would be a massive understatement. Tensions were at a high for several years between North Sydney and the SCA but I’m sure everyone involved would look back now and just shake their heads with a smile.
It was an extraordinary week and I’m sure anyone involved will never forget it. The SCA rule book got a complete overhaul in the winter months and one day matches were locked in as the last round moving forward. For the record, we beat St George in the semi-final and Murray Tobias joined in the team song at Hurstville Oval. Bankstown defeated Wests and we then lost to Bankstown in the Grand Final which was one of the most unbelievable finals ever played. But that’s another story.
The SCA went on a witch hunt about a perceived contrived result yet were comfortable in denying Minor Premiers Western Suburbs natural justice of playing their semi final against Bankstown at their home ground.
Whose actions were more contrived?
A costly week off for the Dragons