Shane McAdam tribunal appeal: Crows appeal fails, McAdam to miss next three games

Adelaide forward Shane McAdam’s fate has been decided after the Crows appealed his three-game suspension given to him by the AFL tribunal.

Shane McAdam.

Adelaide has failed in its bid to downgrade Shane McAdam‘s three-match ban for his bump on GWS’ Jacob Wehr.

After a marathon hearing at the AFL‘s Appeals Board, the Crows bid to downgrade McAdam’s penalty was thrown out.

The Crows, through lawyer Tom Duggan KC, challenged the finding that the impact of McAdam‘s bump should be classed as severe.

Duggan argued that an error of law had been made by the Tribunal in giving too much consideration to the potential to cause injury in their decision.

“You can’t just come along and use the potential of injury clause to elevate the conduct charge by saying something might have gone wrong,” he said.

“That is not exercising the restraint needed… you are changing the characteristics of an incident.”

Duggan also argued that the decision of the Tribunal was “so unreasonable that no Tribunal acting reasonably” could come to such a decision.

The Crows’ appeal has failed. Photo by Phil Hillyard

“It’s an entirely inappropriate way in which to deal with this,” he said.

“This is a bump to the chest and arm and all of a sudden it’s being charged as a head incident ... and elevated to something it’s not.

“The mere fact you reach the view there is potential for injury to the head doesn’t mean you suddenly elevate impact to severe, as the Tribunal seems to assume.”

Duggan argued that this by the Tribunal saw them “reimagine the incident in a way that was impermissible”.

As they did in the Tribunal hearing, the Crows brought up Melbourne’s Kysaiah Pickett getting two weeks for his bump on Bulldog Bailey Smith just a day before.

Duggan said just because Smith didn’t have to have a Head Impact Assessment like Wehr did, it didn’t mean Pickett and McAdam’s bumps should be treated differently.

He called this the “iron jaw example” where Smith somehow didn’t get hurt.

In response Nick Pane KC, representing the AFL, said the Crows failed to “account for the consequences of the bump as a whole and considering the potential for injury” and they were trying to question the Tribunal’s expertise.

“Just because the appellant disagrees… it does not mean that the Tribunal has erred,” he said.

“This appeal dresses up as error of law, matters that really go to the heart of the expertise of the Tribunal.”

McAdam will miss the next three games. (Photo by Will Russell/AFL Photos via Getty Images)

After a deliberation of around two-hours the Appeals Board found that the Tribunal did not err or commit an error of law.

Murray Kellam KC, overseeing the hearing, said “the potential for injury is a significant matter in the classification of offences”.

“In our view the Tribunal committed no error of law in concluding that the classification of impact was severe,” he said.

“It was open to the Tribunal to place great weight (on potential for injury) in our view.

“It found that Mr McAdam chose to bump at particular speed where a reasonably prudent player would have concluded there was a considerably risk of injury to a player with the ball.”

Mr Kellam said it should also be noted that the Tribunal contained two “highly experienced ex-AFL players” and it was “not bound by previous decisions”.

“The appellant has established no error of law in that regard,” he said.

McAdam will miss matches against Richmond, Port Adelaide and Fremantle.

‘IMPOSSIBLE TO JUSTIFY’: PICKETT-MCADAM DISCREPANCY SLAMMED

The three-match ban levelled at Shane McAdam is “impossible to justify” when Kysaiah Pickett received two weeks for his bump, inaugural Adelaide coach Graham Cornes says ahead of the Crows challenge of the penalty.

It’s understood McAdam was left fuming and the Crows bewildered when he was slapped with a three-match ban for his bump on GWS’ Jacob Wehr on Sunday.

An appeal against McAdam’s three-match suspension will be heard on Thursday.

The Crows were privately left staggered that match review officer Michael Christian graded the impact of McAdam’s and Pickett’s incidents differently.

Adelaide showed vision of Pickett’s launch at Bulldog Bailey Smith during their defence of McAdam on Tuesday.

Cornes said the two were near identical hits.

“It is impossible to justify that verdict (three-matches) when you compare it to the Pickett one,” he said.

“It was unnecessary and perhaps undisciplined and a two-match suspension would have been appropriate.

“But to have it singled out for three matches as opposed to two is another indication of the South Australian players, particularly Adelaide Crows players, being judged more harshly than players playing for Victorian clubs.”

While Pickett’s hit was deemed ‘high’ impact, triggering a two-match ban, McAdam’s was graded as ‘severe’ – which then ordered him to front the tribunal.

On Tuesday night the tribunal issued a stern warning that the “potential for injury and serious injury” was very high with McAdam’s bump.

McAdam argued it was never his intention to harm Wehr.

Shane McAdam has been suspended for his late hit on Jacob Wehr.

2 weeks for this Pickett hit on Smith seems incredibly lenient.

As someone who watches both #NRL and #AFL I reckon this is a 4-5 week ban in rugby league (irrespective of whether it resulted in a concussion).pic.twitter.com/RBUmvmUGmb

— Mark Gottlieb (@MarkGottlieb) March 20, 2023

After the verdict was handed down Crows head of football Adam Kelly said the club maintained “that the force made with the Giants player’s head was not significant or forceful”.

“We will maintain that, that is our position and nothing has changed our position of that,” he said.

On Wednesday McAdam’s teammate Izak Rankine said it was disappointing to potentially lose him for matches against Richmond, Port Adelaide and Fremantle.

He said players were aware of the risk of choosing to bump.

“I think we all know what we can and can’t do,” he said.

“We understand if you choose to bump you have to do it fairly.”

"I actually thought Pickett's was worse than McAdam" - Toby & Lachie share their view on the state of the bump, and the incidents on the weekend.

📺Watch #AFL360 on Ch. 504 or stream via @kayosports: https://t.co/7kvglvquIapic.twitter.com/Vz5cLgA3EN

— Fox Footy (@FOXFOOTY) March 21, 2023

WTF??

And Kossie Pickett’s doesn’t?

How can you be so inconsistent after the FIRST ROUND??? https://t.co/2AH3eK9pbr

— Ryan Fitzgerald (@FitzySA) March 20, 2023

Cornes said the bump was “outdated” and needed to be coached out of the game.

“If the AFL doesn’t ban it then surely the coaches should instruct their players not to bump when it is so much easier and safer to tackle,” he said.

“If trying to intimidate the opposition is part of the plan, fierce tackling can do that just as effectively as bumping.”

Dual Crows premiership captain Mark Bickley said on Wednesday the confusion around the differences in bans levelled to McAdam and Smith could be attributed to the AFL’s head of football position still being vacant.

“It has to be someone of weight to explain to the football public what they are going to do with something like this when two nearly identical incidents happen and we get different results,” he said on SEN SA.