Tom Barrass tribunal hearing: West Coast defender’s one-match ban for tackle on Michael Walters upheld

The AFL has dismissed West Coast’s attempt to free star defender Tom Barrass from a one-game ban using the “exceptional and compelling circumstances” defence which saved Charlie Cameron.

PERTH, AUSTRALIA – APRIL 20: Tom Barrass and Jake Waterman of the Eagles celebrates a goal and during the 2024 AFL Round 06 match between the West Coast Eagles and the Fremantle Dockers at Optus Stadium on April 20, 2024 in Perth, Australia. (Photo by Daniel Carson/AFL Photos via Getty Images)

West Coast defender Tom Barrass will miss Sunday’s clash with Gold Coast after his one-match suspension for rough conduct was upheld by the AFL Tribunal, following a nearly two and a half hour hearing, despite the Eagles attempt to deploy a ‘good guy’ defence.

Barass opted to challenge the ban he initially received for a dangerous tackle on Fremantle’s Michael Walters in West Coast’s upset derby win.

The Eagles had attempted to downgrade the impact from medium to low which would’ve resulted in a fine. But after more than an hour of deliberation, the tribunal ruled that Walters’ head hit the ground with force, one of his arms was pinned and he was rotated by a bigger and stronger player, creating significant potential for a serious head or neck injury.

In the event that the medium grading was upheld, the Eagles attempted to lean on the ‘compelling and exceptional circumstances’ provision that cleared Brisbane forward Charlie Cameron last week.

Tom Barrass is free to play this week. Picture: Daniel Carson/AFL Photos via Getty Images

But despite Barrass’ “commendable record,” which included charitable work and character references from former West Coast chairman Russell Gibbs and teammate Jeremy McGovern, the tribunal said that a one-match suspension was fair in the circumstances and that there needs to be a “disincentive for players contemplating dangerous tackles.”

Barrass pleaded guilty to the charge subject to the incident being reclassified as low impact. West Coast Eagles counsel David Grace QC, representing Barrass, said that the “the only element to be disputed is the impact.”

Walters was assessed following the incident but didn’t receive any treatment and was able to play out the game. A medical report also indicated that he hasn’t missed any training nor is he expected to sit out Fremantle’s clash with the Western Bulldogs are a result of the tackle.

Barrass conceded that he used excessive force in the circumstances, intending to tackle Walters and force a stoppage inside 50. Barrass also spoke with Walters both after the incident and post-game.

WHAT AN ABSOLUTE EMBARRASSMENT https://t.co/JVoyUnFinb

— Will Schofield (@WillSchofield) April 24, 2024

Tom Barrass tackle on Michael Walters.

Barrass has been fined twice, once for a partaking in a melee and once for striking North Melbourne’s Charlie Comben. But he has never been before a tribunal in 138 games of AFL football and around 50 games at WAFL level.

The Eagles also submitted a series of stills, pointing out the fact that Barrass broke Walters fall and also that his head hit the football first before it hit the ground. The AFL argued that another angle shows Walters’ head did hit the ground first.

As well as being a fiancé and father of two young children, Barrass told the tribunal he had “philanthropic interests.” Barrass is on the board of the McGovern foundation which raises money for and provides P-plate licenses to Indigenous youth.

He also is involved with the ’16 Days in WA’ domestic violence campaign through West Coast’s association and Barrass has been a wellbeing consultant at Hale School, teaching year eight students meditation. “He is truly a role model for the game,” Grace said.

AFL counsel Andrew Woods asked the tribunal to consider that Walters was in a vulnerable position and that Barrass had to consider his potential to cause injury, questioning the Eagles defender on what part his momentum played in the incident and whether he was aware that he had pinned the Dockers’ arm in the tackle.

Woods argued that while Walters had his left arm free, it wasn’t enough to prevent the hit. The AFL added that if Walters had both arms free or less force was used, it would’ve been a different outcome. Instead, the force, speed and rotation could’ve caused injury, lending itself to a medium grading.

The AFL also argued that exceptional and compelling circumstances don’t apply to Barrass’ hearing because he’s played less games than Cameron, his impact isn’t on the lower end of careless like the Brisbane forward and that it’s not unusual for AFL players to partake in community work.

Originally published as Tom Barrass tribunal hearing: West Coast defender’s one-match ban for tackle on Michael Walters upheld