AFL Tribunal 2023: Will Day’s appeal fails, Geelong accepts Gary Rohan’s one-match ban

The tribunal’s decision on Hawk Will Day’s sling tackle is in, while the Cats have decided against challenging Gary Rohan’s one-game ban. Get the latest from the tribunal here.

Will Day of the Hawks tackles Brad Close of the Cats. Picture: Michael Klein

Hawthorn young gun Will Day has failed to have his two-week suspension downgraded at the AFL Tribunal.

Day tried to argue that his sling tackle on Geelong’s Brad Close was of medium impact rather than high which would have seen his suspension reduced by a week.

But the tribunal found Day had used “considerable” force with the potential for significant injury keeping the impact in the higher bracket.

Despite a medical report from Geelong revealing Close suffered no issues from the incident during or after the game, the new guidelines which focus on the potential for injury is what buried the Hawks midfielder.

Day was banned for this tackle on Brad Close. Pic: Michael Klein

The hearing lasted for an hour before the tribunal, which included former Melbourne captain David Neitz and ex-Tiger Stephen Jurica, adjourned for another 25 minutes to dismiss Day‘s appeal.

Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson said the absence of injury was not the determining factor, more the fact there was significant potential for concussion or a facial injury.

Day will miss Sunday‘s clash with the GWS Giants and the round 6 game against Adelaide.

Earlier Geelong had a late change of heart and accepted Gary Rohan’s one-week ban for a sling tackle.

Just minutes before the AFL Tribunal was scheduled to start sitting, the Cats changed their minds and withdrew their intention to challenge.

Rohan will now miss Sunday’s clash with West Coast.

THE AFL’S CONTRADICTION ON HEAD-HIGH HITS

— Jay Clark

At some point the AFL has a decision to make on head-high contact.

Footy clubs and its fans were right for thinking the AFL wanted to crack down on high hits in a bid to protect players and limit the kind of brain injuries which are ruining players’ lives post-career.

But following the tribunal verdicts on Tuesday night, there is mass confusion and complete inconsistency on the issue.

From a judicial point of view, the league’s left hand has no idea what the right hand is doing on this issue due to the difference of opinion and absolute chasm between the match review verdicts and tribunal outcomes.

The match review panel wants to be tough on head-high contact and upgrade the impact of incidents to reflect the actions rather than the outcomes.

That’s why the league uses the ‘potential to cause serious injury’ to upgrade the force of collisions.

But the tribunal hasn’t got the 2023 concussion memo.

Tom Lynch’s bump on Alex Keath left the Bulldog concussed, yet Lynch received no penalty. Pic: Michael Klein

We may know more after Hawthorn’s Will Day and Geelong’s Gary Rohan challenge their dangerous tackle charges at the tribunal on Thursday night.

But in the days and weeks ahead, the match review panel needs to be brought on to the same page as the tribunal, or vice versa. Otherwise it’s anyone’s guess.

Former Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley said the tribunal should have upheld Lynch’s ban because the Tiger “didn’t make a play on the football”. His hands were nowhere near the Sherrin when he turned and braced for contact on Saturday, ploughing into Alex Keath’s head.

When Adelaide’s David Mckay was cleared for smashing into Saint Hunter Clark in 2021, it’s because both players had their hands on the footy.

That was understandable. A line in the sand.

Following the Lynch verdict, what counts as being ‘in the contest’ when a collision occurs? The footy was previously the key reference point. Now the lines are blurred somewhat.

But perhaps the Harry McKay case was an even bigger head scratcher.

McKay raised his forearm into Harry Sheezel’s head, and had the impact downgraded from medium (one match) to low (fine) at the tribunal.

Great for McKay, and the Blues, but the big picture is troubling for anyone wanting to get a line of sight on how the AFL views head-high hits and brain injuries.

Harry McKay had his hit on Harry Sheezel thrown out at the tribunal. (Photo by Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images)

Four rounds into the new season, the game is caught in a halfway house on the issue, after banning Griffin Logue and Kysaiah Pickett for two games for their bumps, and letting off McKay and Lynch.

The most curious aspect, aside from the overall inconsistency, was that in the summary findings in the McKay case the tribunal found there wasn’t “real potential for a head injury”.

Don’t worry about high-flying forearms, anymore, boys.

That’s because McKay’s arms separate just before the point of impact, to lessen the force, they said.

But in the findings, there was a comparison between Rhys Mathieson’s strike on Pickett in 2021, which was graded low impact. Same as McKay, the tribunal decided.

But haven’t things changed in the past 18 months?

The clear impression from the match review findings is that the game has become tougher on head-high hits.

The threshold for a head-high incident has been lowered. Avoid the head. Protect the brain. It’s been the motto.

But if the tribunal is still comparing incidents to 2021, are we stuck in the past? It seems so.

HAWKS, CATS FIGHTING DANGEROUS TACKLE BANS

— Sam Landsberger

The legality of dangerous tackles is set to come under the microscope with another lengthy night at the tribunal looming as frustrated clubs continue to challenge charges from the AFL’s Match Review Officer.

Hawthorn’s Will Day (two matches) and Geelong’s Gary Rohan (one match) will both fight for freedom or downgraded penalties after they were wiped out by MRO Michael Christian on Tuesday.

Gary Rohan has been offered a one-match suspension for this tackle on Changkuoth Jiath.

Full details: https://t.co/JjVEp60U0Tpic.twitter.com/8aYA33Z0J0

— AFL (@AFL) April 11, 2023

Both players were charged with rough conduct for their dangerous tackles during the Easter Monday clash at the MCG.

Day wrapped up opponent Bradley Close as they both collapsed into the turf in one quick motion. Christian graded that tackle as careless conduct, high impact and high contact.

Rohan’s tackle on Changkuoth Jiath was more of a classic sling tackle. That was graded as careless conduct, medium impact and high contact.

The MRO appears to be grading charges and penalising players more on the potential to cause injury this year – rather than the outcome of the action.

Will Day has been offered a two-match suspension for this tackle on Brad Close. pic.twitter.com/pzzaxP5oly

— AFL (@AFL) April 11, 2023

Speaking on AFL360 on Tuesday night, Hawks legend Dermott Brereton was surprised that Day was offered a longer ban than Rohan.

The tribunal has sat every round so far this season as clubs continue to disagree with the MRO. On Tuesday night Carlton’s Harry McKay and Richmond’s Tom Lynch both had their suspensions overturned while Gold Coast’s Charlie Ballard also escaped suspension for a striking charge earlier this year.

That allowed Ballard to line up against Geelong and its key forward Jeremy Cameron and Tom Hawkins. Ballard also kicked a critical last-quarter goal in the upset win.

Former St Kilda coach Grant Thomas lashed the decision to refer Lynch directly to the tribunal.

AFL referring Lynch to tribunal proves their complete lack of understanding of football & contests. Embarrassing. Correct decision with McKay. Sling tackle penalties absurd, ridiculous. Should be $10K fine…no suspension. Wait for more knee jerk rulings by concussion paranoid AFL

— Grant Thomas (@Thomo_Grant) April 11, 2023

“AFL referring Lynch to tribunal proves their complete lack of understanding of football & contests. Embarrassing. Correct decision with McKay,” Thomas tweeted.

“Sling tackle penalties absurd, ridiculous. Should be $10K fine … no suspension. Wait for more knee jerk rulings by concussion paranoid AFL”