David Mackay case: Why the AFL tribunal made the right decision by not suspending Crow

Forget David Mackay’s collision with Hunter Clark. There’s an act that happens every week the AFL should be more concerned about, writes Andrew Capel.

Crows midfielder David Mackay Tribunal hearing

After a week of conjecture, Adelaide veteran David Mackay is free to play in the club’s Round 15 clash against Carlton.

Sanity prevailed.

The AFL Tribunal’s decision to clear him of any wrongdoing for his heavy collision with St Kilda’s Hunter Clark at Cazaly’s Stadium in Cairns last Saturday night is the right one.

The 32-year-old Mackay, who has a reputation among his peers as being one of the cleanest players in the game, did nothing more than attack the football hard when he “cleaned up’’ Clark and broke his jaw.

Stream selected Fox Footy shows on Kayo Freebies completely free this June including AFL 360, On The Couch, Bounce & more. No Credit Card. No-brainer. Register Free Now >

David Mackay is free to face Carlton in his side’s next game. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Emma Brasier

No-one likes to see a player get injured, particularly seriously.

But Mackay was not guilty of a crime.

He is no wrecking ball.

Mackay simply did what any coach would ask of a player – attack the ball with great vigour when it is in dispute.

Running at breakneck speed, he had eyes only for the footy.

There did not appear to be any intent to knock Clark rotten.

Mackay’s hands, outstretched, were almost on the ball when the pair crossed paths.

It was not a bump, but an unfortunate collision between two players charging with equal ferocity.

The officiating field umpire did not even pay a free kick and there was no remonstrating between players of either team, which is usually a sign of whether something untoward has occurred.

Mackay’s collision with Hunter Clark. Picture: Fox Sports

AFL Match Review Officer Michael Christian saw nothing wrong with the incident but, unfortunately, AFL football boss Steve Hocking disagreed, sending it straight to the tribunal.

Mackay’s act wasn’t, as the AFL suggested, “unreasonable in the circumstances’’.

There is a fine line between pleasure and pain.

After the Crows produced one of their greatest comebacks, fighting back from six goals behind to win by six points, coach Matthew Nicks hailed Mackay’s attack on the ball, labelling it a “genuine contest”.

“We don’t want to see anybody get injured,” Nicks said.

“I thought both players were going for the ball.

“If you talk about a moment in the game for a senior player to stand up, we hadn’t scored at that point … and the way ‘D-Mac’ attacked it, we ended up winning contested ball by 23 for the rest of the game, we scored nine goals to four maybe for the rest of the game.

“It was a real key moment in the turnaround. Guys regrouped and put their shields up and went to work.

“I’ve got no doubt when you see a teammate put his body on the line, which both players did, it gives you belief.”

Matthew Nicks described the incident as a genuine contest. Picture Sarah Reed

Former Swans star Ryan O’Keeffe hit the nail on the head when he said: “It was a fair crack at the ball. Unfortunately, someone got hurt”

The incident appeared to be no more than an accident.

And players should not be penalised for accidents of this nature, when their sole focus appears to be the ball.

Accidents do and will continue to happen in a contact sport.

The AFL seems too focused on outcome rather than intent.

It is understandable that the league wants to crack down on head knocks.

Concussions are a serious issue in the sport – both for players and the AFL’s coffers, given the risk of possible lawsuits.

But Australian football is a contact sport.

Players should be aware of the risks when they start playing and make an educated decision about whether it is the right sport for them.

Batsmen in cricket know the risks when they face bowlers pinging the ball towards their head at 150kmph.

The AFL has cracked down on concussion in recent years. Picture: Sarah Reed

Sure, they wear helmets but the risk of serious injury still exists.

The AFL should be more concerned with stopping players punching opponents in the back of the head in marking contests.

Those hits cause concussions and they are illegal but players get away with them every week.

If the AFL Tribunal had banned Mackay for his collision with Clark it would have changed the fabric of the game.

Surely if the ball is in dispute, you can go for it.

Even veteran Richmond key forward Jack Riewoldt feared the game wouldn’t be the same if Mackay was banned.

“I think it will add hesitation and confusion into the current day players’ head in terms of how to pick the ball up (if Mackay is suspended),” Riewoldt said prior to the tribunal hearing.

“If he leads with his own head there he’s obviously putting himself in a position to seriously damage his head and his neck and he stepped over the ball like we‘ve always been taught to do.

“I think it would certainly add a sense of confusion if it went that way (ban).”

Thankfully, it didn’t!