Brayden Maynard tribunal hearing: AFL world reacts after Collingwood star found not guilty

Brayden Maynard has been cleared by the AFL tribunal after a monster three hours of evidence presented, but there could be an appeal coming. See the details here.

Brayden Maynard tribunal verdict.

Brayden Maynard’s flag hopes have been given life but Angus Brayshaw’s brother has called upon the AFL to appeal the tribunal finding that leaves the Collingwood defender free to play in a preliminary final.

Maynard was cleared after a four-hour blockbuster hearing on Tuesday, when the tribunal found he acted reasonably in his attempt to smother Brayshaw’s kick and did not have time to act differently when he turned his shoulder into the Demon’s head during Thursday night’s qualifying final.

The AFL can appeal the decision and will consider whether to take the case further on Wednesday.

The AFL’s football boss Laura Kane took the unprecedented step of putting her name to a match review verdict the day after the Maynard hit, when her title was listed alongside match review officer Michael Christian in sending Maynard’s case to the tribunal with a minimum of a three-match ban.

Collingwood football boss Graham Wright said on Tuesday night that the Magpies were hoping the case was finished and no appeal would come.

“We thought that Jeff Gleeson, the (tribunal) chairman’s summation of the tribunal hearing and what we put forward as evidence was really clear so we are hopeful that this is it,” he said.

Brayden Maynard is not home free yet. Picture: Getty Images

But Brayshaw’s brother Hamish declared on Tuesday, before the hearing, that he would be disappointed if the AFL didn’t appeal a not-guilty verdict, after his brother was knocked out in the incident.

“I probably would be, I think if it went not guilty and no-one appealed it from there (the AFL) it would be, I think a little bit of an injustice because if it went the other way I’m sure Collingwood would be appealing it,” he told SEN.

“I am not over the ins and outs of the tribunal but if you leave the ground and make contact to the face, that is the way it has been (that you are suspended).

“There have been a lot of people saying it is going to set a precedent and it has divided a lot of people. But for me, really at the end of the day, the outcome of that doesn’t bother me as much as the outcome of his (Angus) health.”

Hamish Brayshaw believes there should be an appeal.. Picture: SANFL Image/David Mariuz

Maynard’s escape plan came together after his lawyer Ben Ihle successfully argued that he made a fair decision to jump and attempt a smother on Brayshaw.

Gleeson, who was joined on the tribunal by Darren Gaspar and Scott Stevens, said in his judgement that Brayshaw had stepped into the path of Maynard after the Magpie had left the ground and Maynard couldn’t have expected to definitely make contact.

“We are not at all satisfied that a reasonable player would have foreseen that violent impact or the impact of the type suffered by Brayshaw was inevitable or even likely,” Gleeson said.

Maynard himself said in evidence that he didn’t see Brayshaw coming until the last moment.

“I turned my head to land thought ‘shit, he is there’,” Maynard said.

Maynard said he “flinched” before making contact and the tribunal agreed that he didn’t have time to protect Brayshaw, despite AFL lawyer Andrew Woods’ argument he should have put his arms out.

Ihle painstakingly went through vision moment by moment and argued Maynard had only “0.12 to 0.15 between seeing Mr Brayshaw and contact being made”.

This evidence aligned with star expert evidence from Australian Catholic University biomechanist Professor Michael Cole, who argued that there wasn’t enough time for Maynard to make a conscious decision to protect Brayshaw while in mid-air.

“It is asking a lot of a player to decide in a fraction of a second which various ways to land … and which of those ways of landing might result in which type of reportable offence,” Gleeson said.

Gleeson was a pains to point out before deliberations that the Maynard verdict was for this singular case only and not a decision on the state of football and what is a football act.

8:03PM: MAYNARD CLEARED TO PLAY

Collingwood talisman Brayden Maynard has survived his “oh sh**” moment and his premiership dream is back alive after he was cleared by the AFL tribunal.

After three full hours of evidence on Tuesday, the tribunal of Darren Gaspar, Scott Stevens and chair Jeff Gleeson, found Maynard’s hit on Angus Brayshaw was a pure accident and not worthy of suspension.

Collingwood fought the charge against Maynard by arguing his action was not careless and was therefore not rough conduct, and the tribunal agreed.

Maynard and his lawyer Ben Ihle argued that the Magpie was partaking in a standard football act by jumping to smother Brayshaw’s kick in Thursday’s qualifying final and acted appropriately when he turned his body and made contact with the Demon.

Maynard said he “flinched” when he realised he was going to connect with Brayshaw, after Brayshaw veered into his path while the Magpie was in mid-air.

“I just sort of flinched and sort of tensed up because I thought ‘oh sh**’,” Maynard said in evidence.

Brayden Maynard has avoided a ban from the AFL tribunal. Picture: Michael Klein.

Australian Catholic University professor Michael Cole spoke through the reaction times of professional athletes and argued Maynard did not have time to make a decision to bump Brayshaw when he was in mid-air, a point reiterated by Ihle when he went through painstaking vision of how long the defender had to react before the hit.

“This was unfortunate, this was an accident and this was not unreasonable conduct,” Ihle said of the incident.

The AFL will now consider whether it will fight the tribunal’s decision and send the case to an appeal.

7:05PM: PIES CASE FINALISED

Collingwood has finalised its case, telling the tribunal the incident was an accident and not unreasonable.

Ihle drew reference to Richmond’s Tom Lynch and a case the lawyer successfully argued earlier this year, that Lynch reacted in self-defence in a marking contest that concussed Alex Keath in April.

The Collingwood lawyer said Maynard’s case was similar in that it was just a physical moment on the football field without any malice.

“It’s just one of those unfortunate things that happens from time to time in a high velocity, high intensity contact sport,” Ihle said.

“This was unfortunate, this was an accident and that this was not unreasonable conduct.”

Before heading off to deliberations, tribunal chair Gleeson said this case was not to be a marquee moment for the AFL, but just simply a decision on a single moment between Maynard and Brayshaw.

Tribunal members Gleeson, Gaspar and Stevens have gone to discuss the case, three hours after evidence began.

Brayden Maynard has had a long Tuesday night. Picture: Michael Klein

6:39PM: ‘0.12 TO 0.15 SECONDS’

Collingwood has boiled down the entire case to “0.12 to 0.15 seconds” as it painstakingly goes through vision matched with reaction time.

Ihle presented vision of Maynard leaving the ground and the time it took for the moments that happened afterwards.

On the footage, Maynard touched the ball with his right hand as part of his attempted smother 0.24 seconds after he left the ground, saw Brayshaw coming towards him at 0.44 seconds and made contact at 0.56 seconds.

Ihle said “0.12 to 0.15 seconds between seeing Mr Brayshaw and contact being made”.

“Perhaps we don’t even need an expert to tell us, that is a period of time that for even the most superhuman of athletes is just not enough,” he said.

The case has now been heard over more than two-and-a-half hours.

6:19PM: BRAYSHAW VEERED INTO MAYNARD’S PATH

Collingwood has pointed to still images from behind the goals to show that Maynard was not on track to hit Brayshaw until the Demon veered into his path.

One of the Magpie arguments has been that Maynard was not in line with Brayshaw when he left the ground and it was Brayshaw, who stepped to the right after kicking, that contributed to contact.

In his evidence, Maynard said he didn’t expect to collect Brayshaw and he moved his arms to the right to smother the ball because he was on a different track to the Melbourne player.

“May I suggest a collision is not inevitable, it is not even likely,” Ihle said.

One of the AFL’s leading arguments was that Maynard was careless in jumping because he was sure to clean up Brayshaw.

Seconds before impact.

6:05PM: MAYNARD ‘HAS LARGELY GONE STRAIGHT UP’

Collingwood’s lawyer Ihle has begun a deep dive on how far Maynard moved forward when he jumped towards Brayshaw.

Ihle argues he didn’t move that far forward in his jump, indicating he wasn’t actively putting Brayshaw in danger, as the AFL has argued.

“Whilst his body is leaning forward, he has largely gone straight up,” Ihle said.

Collingwood has argued that Maynard was “entitled” to come forward to Brayshaw and jump towards him, pushing against the AFL’s argument that he was endangering Brayshaw by jumping towards him.

Ihle has begun comparing how far Maynard jumped to a simple stride length, using side-on footage.

Evidence continues more than two hours after the hearing began.

Melbourne players targeted Maynard after the bump. Picture: Getty Images

5:54: AFL CONCLUDES ITS CASE

The AFL has concluded its case, arguing that Maynard did not flinch and instead made a decision to tuck up and hit Brayshaw.

Woods declared Maynard should be guilty of rough conduct given he chose both to jump towards Brayshaw knowing he would inevitably collect him and also that he made a split-second decision to tuck in his shoulder.

Woods suggested Maynard can only get off from his suspension if the tribunal disagrees with each of those two points.

“It is not simply a flinch, it is a conscious turning of the body to absorb impact,” Woods said.

5:21PM: PROF COLE HAS JOINED THE CHAT

Biomechanics expert Professor Michael Cole has tendered a report, made up of written questions and answers about the Maynard incident.

Cole, an expert in neuromuscular control and the movements that can be made by the body with its connection with his brain, wrote once Maynard had left the ground he had no choice but to collide with Brayshaw.

Cole said Maynard’s body position when curled up his shoulder and hit Brayshaw was not a conscious decision.

“All I am sort of suggesting here is based on the numbers and the research, it is difficult to conclusively say Mr Maynard, under the circumstances, would have been able to make any conscious decision to reposition his body,” Cole said.

The aftermath of the incident. Picture: Michael Klein

4:52PM: AFL LAWYER SAYS ROUGH CONDUCT TWO-FOLD

AFL lawyer Woods has argued that the rough conduct Maynard committed was two-fold, in both making a reckless decision to jump and smother and by the way he collected Brayshaw.

Woods said while smothers are common in football, injuring players by doing so is uncommon.

“The fact is it’s not common and there is a reason why it is not common and that reason is that a player in Maynard’s position, who is leaping forward with force … they risk badly injuring their opponent and therefore it is a dangerous action to undertake and it breaches the duty of care to the other player,” Woods said.

Woods admitted the charge would almost certainly be dismissed if the tribunal finds the action was not rough conduct and Maynard would be free to play in the preliminary final.

Gleeson questioned whether Woods believed Maynard should not have jumped at all to smother.

“There are times in the modern game where you do have to pull your punches,” Woods said.

Gleeson began questioning Woods on what part of the smother action was dangerous.

4:34PM: MAYNARD ‘I THOUGHT ‘OH SH**’

Brayshaw would have been hit no matter if Maynard put his arms out or braced with his shoulder, the Collingwood defender said.

Maynard said “with all due respect, the same outcome would have happened no matter” what when asked by Gleeson if he could have put his arms out to protect Brayshaw.

He answered the same when asked if he could have put his arms out by his side in a hugging motion.

“I feel the same outcome would have happened because it was a collision,” Maynard said.

Maynard again said when he was in the air and realised he was going to hit Brayshaw he “just sort of flinched and sort of tensed up because I thought ‘oh sh**’”.