Tom Green and Ken Hinkley have their say on the dangerous tackle debate

GWS star Tom Green has unloaded on the MRO and AFL tribunal, saying the crackdown on tackling is a ‘disgrace’ and that the league ‘is protecting themselves from a lawsuit in 30 years’.

Giants midfielder Tom Green has unloaded on the crackdown on tackling by the AFL match review officer and tribunal, labelling it as a “disgrace” and that the league “is protecting themselves from a lawsuit in 30 years”.

On this week’s episode of in-house GWS podcast In the Green Room, which has since been deleted, Green expressed concern about the impact of the crackdown - saying it was“ruining the game”.

The comments came prior to the Giants successfully appealing Toby Bedford’s controversial three-match ban for his tackle on Richmond midfielder Tim Taranto.

Green, also an AFL Players Association representative and leadership team member for the Giants, said there was something wrong when Port Adelaide star Zak Butters ultimately missed no games for striking him in Round 14 yet Bedford copped a three-match ban for a tackle that was “non-dirty”.

Tom Green (R) is not happy with how the MRO and tribunal saw Toby Bedford’s tackle. Picture: Getty Images

“The general uproar and consensus around the Toby Bedford decision is that it is a disgrace and I couldn’t agree more,” he said on the since-deleted In The Green Room podcast.

“I don’t know if the Tribunal has finally admitted that it is so outcome based but what is a better look for the game? Here is the reality of it, Zak Butters a couple of weeks ago deliberately punched me in the face, which again I don’t want to see him necessarily miss a game for that.

“But in terms of intent and a bad look for the game, Zak Butters punched me in the face and didn’t miss any games.

“(But if I was concussed), I don’t know is he going to miss six weeks because he has punched me in the face and concussed me but Toby Bedford is missing three weeks for committing an in-game, proper, non-dirty, football act and gets three weeks because Tim (Taranto) was concussed.

“I just think there has to be an understanding that we play a contact sport.

“I don’t know what I can and can’t do, am I allowed to punch someone and I am able to get off? Because apparently I can but if I tackle someone and they get concussed I get weeks.

“And I get we have to look after concussions and all this but I feel like the AFL is protecting themselves from a lawsuit in 30 years.”

Green said players understood the risk they took playing the game.

“We are changing the game from what it is, we play a contact sport,” he said.

“One of the reasons why I love playing this game is because it is contact. One of the reasons why people love watching this game is because it is contact.

“OzTag is not a massively viewed sport is it? Touch footy is not a massively viewed sport is it? It is because of the collision and the physical nature of it and the combative sport that we play and the Tribunal is taking it away in a weird way.

“Because you are allowed to punch people and as long as you don’t really hurt them that is fine but that is a way worse look, deliberately hurting people. But if I tackle someone and they accidentally hit their head I miss nearly a month of football? It just doesn’t make sense.”

Green said he was tempted to just not tackle any more given the confusion.

“I just think you are ruining the game, I honestly think the Tribunal with decisions like that is ruining the game,” he said.

“My feel is that they are protecting themselves from a lawsuit in 30 years with the concussion stuff, but it is not fair and it is ruining the game.

Bedford’s tackle on Taranto. Picture: Getty Images

“When Toby Bedford doesn’t do something dirty at all... but maybe next time I’ll tell him I don’t know punch Tim in the face then you won’t get rubbed out.

“It just doesn’t make sense to me and I don’t like the way this stuff is being adjudicated and I think the entire AFL and the consensus of the AFL watching public is that it is a disgrace, because that is what it is.

“I just don’t know what I can and can’t do, so I am not going to tackle any more.”

On Friday GWS chief executive Dave Matthews said “common sense prevailed” with Bedford getting off and said he would like the MRO grading to be re-modelled.

“I think so. I think the framework and trying to fit things into boxes and spit out a particular formula might be something that’s theoretically good and practically doesn’t quite work in every instance,” he said.

“And that is possibly one at the moment but I’ve got great faith in Andrew Dillon and his team to review that as we go forward.

“I just wouldn’t like to see players like Toby miss games for what is effectively something that I think was a reasonable tackle in the circumstances.

“Our question at the start of the week was what is he expected to do? What else could he have done?

“And we felt that the judgment of the tribunal outlining a number of things that they said a reasonable player should have done, to us was largely those things are unreasonable given the split-second nature of what happens in a context sport.”

Ken Hinkley is also confused when it comes to tackling. Picture: Getty Images

Meanwhile, Port Adelaide coach Ken Hinkley shared Green’s confusion by tossing an imaginary when asked how he would address tackling with his players or if he had given up trying.

“I don’t know,” Hinkley said.

“I really don’t.”

Asked if he knew what tackles were legal and which were not, Hinkley said: “You’re kidding aren’t you? Me, know what’s legal? I’m not that smart.”

So what would the 12th-year Power mentor now tell his players?

“We tackle with duty of care and that’s the best thing we can do,” he said.

“We understand the risks and responsibilities with it.

“I also get and totally understand what the AFL is trying to achieve.

“The game has changed and the game needed to change.

“We’re all working through it and everyone’s trying to get it right.

“It’s quite a challenge for lots of reasons.”

Originally published as Tom Green and Ken Hinkley have their say on the dangerous tackle debate