Butters was referred directly to the tribunal after he was reported by umpire Nick Foot following a heated incident during Port''s loss to St Kilda on Sunday night at Adelaide Oval.
A free kick was given to St Kilda's Mitch Owens and Port's Ollie Wines took issue with the decision, as did Butters who was penalised 50m and reported for abusive language by Foot as Owens goalled from close range.
Foot alleged Butters said: "How much are they paying you?"
The Port star vehemently denied it and the AFL said the exchange between Butters and Foot was not picked up by the umpire's microphone.
Tuesday's hearing relied on testimony from Foot, Butters, Wines and Port football boss Ben Rutten.
The hearing lasted an hour and 40 minutes, before the panel of Renee Enbom KC, Jason Johnson and Darren Gaspar deliberated for 25 minutes and upheld the charge of abusive and insulting language towards an umpire.
The tribunal had a 5.45pm deadline and gave its verdict before then, with reasoning to be distributed on Wednesday morning.
Foot remained steadfast in his recollection.
"The comment that Butters made to me was "how much are they paying you?" Foot said.
Foot said he interpreted "they" as being "the St Kilda Football Club or someone involved with St Kilda".
"It questioned my integrity," he said.
"I'm 100 per cent adamant that those are the words Zak Butters said to me.
"When your integrity is questioned you don't forget those words that are said to you."
Port stand-in captain Butters was "100 per cent sure" he did not say "how much are they paying you" to Foot.
"I recall saying 'surely that's not a free kick'," Butters said.
The Port star later added: "It hurts me because I know I didn't say it."
Wines was adamant Butters was only asking Foot why he paid the free kick.
"I can't be sure what he said but I'm adamant what he didn't say," Wines said.
18°C