Lions’ Charlie Cameron, Giants Toby Bedford free-to-play in bombshell backflips

The AFL Appeals Board has made a huge call on Brisbane Lions star forward Charlie Cameron after his tackle sparked a week of controversy.

Charlie Cameron and Toby Bedford are free to play. Photo: Getty Images

The AFL world has been stunned after Brisbane Lions forward Charlie Cameron and GWS Giants star Toby Bedford have sensationally had their three-game suspensions overturned in pair of bombshell rulings on Thursday evening.

The AFL world erupted after the decision to ban both Cameron and Bedford for three matches each, decisions which sparked a mountain of criticism.

However both men have had their cases dismissed as the Appeals Board found that the AFL had argued “unreasonable conduct” but had not made a finding on whether the conduct was “likely to cause injury”.

Watch every game of every round this Toyota AFL Premiership Season LIVE with no ad-breaks during play on Kayo. New to Kayo? Start your free trial today >

In the Cameron issue, the AFL Appeals Board ruled the Tribunal made an “error of law”, focusing on the specifics of the rough conduct guidelines rather than the rules of the game.

The Appeals Board also found that the decision met the guidelines of being so unreasonable no Tribunal acting reasonably could’ve made it.

The AFL world had erupted over the issue with it being labelled “bewildering”, “a disgrace”, “utterly ridiculous” and that “the tackle may well be dead and buried” amid a tidal wave of criticism.

Cameron attempted to argue his driving tackle on West Coast’s Liam Duggan was reasonable, claiming the Eagles defender was to blame for the backwards momentum.

But it fell on deaf ears earlier in the week, forcing Brisbane to the Appeals Board.

Charlie Cameron tackles Liam Duggan who is subbed out HIA

The Lions argued that the Tribunal focused on how the rough conduct guidelines impacted the offence rather than finding whether the tackle was reportable, “in effect put the cart before the horse”.

“We say this tackle, the approach to the tackle and the actual tackle itself was a lawful tackle,” Brisbane’s counsel Chris Winneke said.

“It’s not contact between members of the public in a supermarket. It’s between strong, fit people playing on a football field in a contact sport.”

The AFL’s Lisa Hannon argued there was no error of law, arguing that even if the Tribunal had considered the rules over the guidelines, the AFL’s argument would have been “no different”.

While it was far from an endorsement of the tackle which left Duggan concussed, the ruling found that the Tribunal didn’t explain its case well enough and “what the Tribunal did not do was deal with the elements of the charge which is set out in the laws of Australian Football”.

“In particular, what the Tribunal did not deal with was Law 18.7, which is entitled ‘Rough Conduct’,” the Appeals Board ruled read.

“That rule provides as follows, 18.7.1, spirit and intention, players should be protected from unreasonable conduct from an opposition player which is likely to cause injury.

“We accept that the Tribunal below found the conduct to be unreasonable, which is one element of the offence, but it completely failed to consider the second critical element of the offence, that is whether the conduct was likely to cause injury.”

In short, Cameron is free-to-play against the Swans on Sunday.

ABC’s Clint Wheeldon posted: “Common sense prevails. Charlie Cameron is free to play. Well done to the AFL appeals board.”

AFL Media’s Michael Whiting wrote: “So, Charlie Cameron wins at the Appeals Tribunal. Irony not lost on Lions fans following Cripps in ‘22. I’m not sure an ‘error in law’ clears up the tackle situation, but it feels like a good result for the game. Good tackle, and result (which sucks for Duggan) was accidental.”

Another fan wrote: “Great to see Charlie Cameron free to play and the fabric of the game still partially intact.”

Charlie Cameron is free to play. Photo by Paul Kane/Getty Images

Toby Bedford with Tim Taranto. Photo by Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images

The Giants Toby Bedford is hoping he can also follow suit, with Giants counsel Anais d’Arville argued the GWS star’s tackle was not careless within the Tribunal guidelines, arguing the grading of the impact.

Bedford tackled Richmond midfielder Tim Taranto to the ground, leaving the Tigers star dazed.

Taranto exited the game shortly after, not to return. Bedford’s act wasn’t penalised for being dangerous but has since been touted as a potentially suspendable action.

“There was no suggestion of tackling in a way that was different from leaping. For that reason, the finding amounts to a rejection of the first case theory of the AFL that there was an alternative way of tackling,” d’Arvillle said.

Appeals Board chairman Will Houghton claimed d’Arville was “relitigating” the case made at the Tribunal.

But d’Arville argued that the AFL’s argument “goes beyond any athletes’ cognitive and physical limits. It’s simply too much to ask of an athlete in the position of Mr Bedford”.

The Giants also argued that more evidence was needed to show a player could pull off alternative actions.

D’Arville also argued there was a denial of procedural fairness in the MRO finding all reportable incidents that result in concussion “severe” impact, which comes with a three-match ban.

Houghton was reportedly not convinced by the argument.

But the Giants also reportedly noted Cameron’s appeal, claiming Bedford’s case also didn’t conclude Bedford’s tackle was likely to cause injury.

Toby Bedford is free to play as well. Photo by Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images

It worked, with the AFL dismissing the case on appeal on the “error of law” finding.

“Now what is plain that follows from the proper construction of that law is that there are two elements to the offence of rough conduct,” the Appeals Board found.

“First, there’s got to be unreasonable conduct, and secondly, the conduct must be likely to cause injury.

“We accept that the Tribunal below found unreasonable conduct, however it made no finding about whether or not the conduct of Bedford was likely to cause injury.

“There’s nothing in the reasons of the Tribunal that indicate any consideration that second element of the offence of rough conduct, nor is there anything in the transcript dealing with the evidence or submissions of counsel.

“In our previous case, we upheld the appeal of the player because there was no consideration of the second element, being was the conduct likely to cause injury.

“Similarly, in this case, we uphold the appeal on the ground that there was an error of law that had a material impact upon the outcome in the tribunal below. That error of law being a failure to take into account second element of the charge of rough conduct set out in law 18.7.1.”

Taranto was concussed after the tackle. Photo by Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images

AFL great Dermott Brereton was fuming over the Bedford call.

“Previous to this point in time, I would have had confidence in saying, ‘No, we will be back to where we should be (and Bedford would get off)’,” Brereton told SEN Afternoons.

“But I just don’t know. I just don’t know anymore.

“I was having a good think about it, my first game was back in 1982 and that was at senior level. So, I’ve been involved longer than that, but that would give me 42 years in the AFL system of being a player, an administrator, a sometimes coach and a media employee.

“This is, to me, the most disheartening period that we’ve struck, and we’ve come through a few hurdles along the way - the advent of new teams, I’ve seen the admission of four new teams, the rebranding of teams…

“But at the moment, in the fundamentals of our sport - this is the most seismic shift that I think I’ve certainly seen in 42 years.”