Adelaide Crows hero Eddie Betts reveals how AFL training is already reacting to the danger of the bump

BAN the bump? It seems, by Eddie Betts’ observation, AFL coaches are already reacting to how the bump carries a greater risk of suspension.

Richard Douglas of the Crows stands over Zach Merrett of the Bombers after their collision on Friday night. Picture: AAP Image/Julian Smith

• Bone’s Round 1 takeaways and player ratings
• Round 1 Power rankings: How loss can help Crows
• Cornes: Why Crows should send Jenkins back
• Ryder plays waiting game on injury
• The Phantom’s Round 1 review

CROWS cult hero Eddie Betts made a telling admission yesterday after Adelaide decided to challenge the one-game ban on Richard Douglas.

AFL teams - well, at least Adelaide - are working “smarter” training drills on tackling.

There is, noted Betts, the need to go lower in a tackle.

This is the lesson from the extra-time elimination final in September at Adelaide Oval where Port Adelaide wingman Jared Polec’s tackle of West Coast midfielder Luke Shuey settled an epic battle.

Shuey, among others such as Geelong midfielder Joel Selwood, knows when to drop his body mass to engineer a head-high free-kick. So it is best to tackle lower.

Port Adelaide’s exit from the AFL finals last year as Power midfielder Jared Polec was penalised for a high tackle has changed training drills across the league - and might be a trigger to avoiding bans with head-high bumps too. Picture: James Elsby (Getty Images)

Betts also declared AFL players - well, at least at Adelaide - are being told to go for the ball first.

Play the ball rather than opt for the bump - a theme that would have spared Douglas the wrath of new match review officer Michael Christian on Saturday afternoon.

Clearly, the bump is now a risky part of an AFL player’s arsenal. Perhaps too risky.

There are all the “what ifs” from the Douglas moment that cannot be compared with any other bump from previous years. The AFL judiciary’s framework and guidelines are starting again under Christian with no precedents.

So what if Douglas had dislocated Essendon midfielder Zac Merrett’s shoulder and put the All-Australian on the injury list for 12 weeks?

Does the consequence of the bump - the injury - lead to Christian reacting as he would with concussion?

Or does this type of bump - and any injury away from the head - remain just an inevitable fall-out from a collision/contact sport?

There is no doubt concussion creates a much greater concern at AFL House.

Richard Douglas of the Crows and Zach Merrett of the Bombers clash during the match on Friday night. Picture: Michael Willson/AFL Media/Getty Images

The legal masters at AFL House will not tremble at the thought of Merrett and his lawyers appearing on their door step in 20 years to seek compensation from a bump.

But everyone knows - with great warning from the NFL lawsuits - that there is turmoil approaching with the fall-out from repetitive concussions in Australian football.

The AFL cannot be exposed to a billion-dollar risk.

And clearly AFL coaches - well, at least at Adelaide - are getting the message, as relayed by Betts yesterday, they have to train their players to attack the ball first rather than take on an opponent with a bump.

There will be cries of the “fabric of the game” being torn again by over-reactive officials. There will the debate on whether the bump should be banned, a view inaugural Crows coach Graham Cornes endorsed at the weekend.

There will be the watch on how the developing class action from former VFL-AFL players wanting compensation for concussion plays out.

In the meantime, Betts’ revelation that tackling is being refined - and the focus at training is being put on playing the ball rather than the bump - is a telling moment in Australian football.

[e-mail]