AFL great Dermott Brereton whacks the AFL Tribunal system and the prior opportunity rule

Dermott Brereton holds the record for the most suspensions over the past 90 years. So when he says the current MRO/tribunal system is “deplorable and weak in leadership”, it’s time to listen up.

Gary Ablett’s hit on Dylan Shiel. Picture: AAP Images

Picture Big Bad Barry Hall or David Rhys-Jones running in the opposite direction of the football, then running off their line, then raising their elbow and then jumping at an opponent with an elbow aimed toward their head.

They don’t quite land the elbow so there is no real damage done, but the contact takes the opponent off his feet.

It is an action with “intent”.

STATS: HAS AFL FORGOTTEN ABOUT HOLDING THE BALL?

FAMILY: MID-SEASON DRAFT NAMES YOU (SORT OF) KNOW

TRAVIS VARCOE: I WANTED MAGGIE TO BE AT PEACE

Can you imagine an old-fashioned tribunal led by Neil Busse delivering any other outcome than a two-week suspension?

Now substitute Gary Ablett in the same scenario.

There’s only one difference — Gazza got off, again.

Why? Because we assume Gazza plays without any real malice and his North Melbourne opponent last week, Sam Wright, got up.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE SUPERFOOTY PODCAST ON iTunes

I am rapt Ablett is free to play this weekend, it is wonderful to see him in such good form and clearly enjoying his footy.

But I am bewildered as to how we have let our rules completely morph into something that they were never intended to be.

Correct me if I am wrong, but from memory there has always been a longstanding rule in AFL/VFL called “attempting to strike”.

It has always been a reportable offence.

Rarely would someone be suspended, but the report would be made and a reprimand would be handed out.

The next level up was “striking”. If the intent was to strike someone illegally and contact was made, the charge was still “striking”.

Gary Ablett’s hit on Dylan Shiel. Picture: AAP Images

Gary Ablett collects Sam Wright.

At the lower end of this range the player could expect a “severe reprimand”, but if the tribunal had a bad day, the player could expect a one or two-week suspension.

The next level up, again, was “striking”. But if the player hit suffered an injury, a heavy penalty would apply.

But some time during the last decade or so, the action and intent had become less important than the injury sustained.

It’s a bit like getting a good behaviour bond for attempted murder because the victim did not suffer any injuries — we can all move along with just a donation into the poor box on the way out.

Really, how did we get to this?

I am the most suspended player for close to 90 years and even I think the current format is deplorable and weak in leadership by the controlling body.

Intent is what we should be examining, not the club medical officer’s report.

If we have a care for the game, we don’t want people making actions that are dangerous and dangerous in their intent.

Barry Hall’s hit on Brent Staker.

I have seen players at under-14, under-15 and under-16 level attempt to play in the same style and get it horribly wrong.

Yet these kids are trying to emulate what they see on TV.

If an umpire can penalise James Sicily for a push to the chest while behind play, (which I agree with) how can we let an action that has the capability to break a jaw go unpunished?

I just don’t get it.

RANT NO. II

And while I am on the “I just don’t get it” rant, when did the “no prior opportunity” rule give players permission to simply drop the ball?

Please, please, please let’s just do away with this rubbish.

At the very least, can we halve the amount of time allowed to dispose of the ball?

I know people will say, “You have to encourage the players to go for the ball.”

But that is shortsighted idiocy.

You cannot win the game if you don’t have the ball. You can’t kick a goal if you don’t have the ball.

That should be encouragement enough.

Where is the AFL’s holding the ball rule at? Picture: Phil Hillyard

And if you feel you are about to be tackled as soon as you touch the footy, perhaps you can simply knock it on like Richmond’s Shai Bolton and Jack Higgins did against Fremantle last Sunday.

Actions of brilliance that resulted in a Tigers score.

Players in trouble and or looking to waste time will professionally handball to a teammate under pressure now, knowing that he will be automatically tackled.

The umpire will call for a ball up because the player had “no prior opportunity”.

It is a blight on our game. It is an impediment in our rules that invites congestion and slow play.

Tackling is an art and should be rewarded when done correctly.

After hearing AFL boss Gillon McLachlan talk of wanting umpires to have a feel for the game last weekend, perhaps they can feel for the game when a player is not really making a true attempt to dispose of the ball when tackled.

If every tackled player must dispose of the ball by hand or foot correctly regardless of their time in possession, the task of umpiring will become so much clearer and, therefore, easier. Really, there is no other solution.

It worked during the ’70s, ’80s and 90s. Players adapted then, they will adapt now.