Brayden Maynard’s case dismissed in marathon four-hour Tribunal case

Collingwood’s Brayden Maynard is free to play in the AFL finals after the Tribunal ruled on the most controversial collision of the season so far.

Brayden Maynard is free to play. Photo: Getty Images and Fox Footy

Collingwood’s Brayden Maynard is free to play for the rest of the AFL Finals after the Tribunal dismissed his case after the sickening collision with Melbourne’s Angus Brayshaw on Thursday night.

Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson dismissed the charges against Maynard, finding that the Collingwood star acted in a “reasonable” manner incident.

Watch every match of The 2023 Toyota AFL Finals Series before the Grand Final Live & Ad-Break Free During Play on Kayo Sports. Join now and start streaming instantly >

Maynard was attempting to smother a kick from outside 50 from star Melbourne midfielder Angus Brayshaw in the first qualifying final at the MCG, leaping into the air, before turning and bracing his shoulder for impact with Brayshaw and catching his head, knocking out the Dees gun for two minutes.

With Maynard and Collingwood figures alike labelling the attempted smother as a “football act”, the subsequent referral to the Tribunal by AFL executive general manager of football Laura Kane sent the football world into a frenzy.

Gleeson handed down the ruling, saying the AFL had argued the rough conduct charge in two ways — that Maynard’s attempt was “unreasonable” and that he breached his duty of care by “failing to cushion the impact” by not bracing himself.

Gleeson said the panel found “Maynard’s decision was reasonable”.

“We accept a reasonable player would have foreseen at the moment of committing to the act of smothering that some impact with Brayshaw was possible,” he said. “We find that it was not inevitable from the perspective of a player in Maynard’s position.

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

It also found that Maynard didn’t have time to make another decision on how to impact Brayshaw and said the Magpies star was “not careless in either his decision to smother or the way in which his body formed”.

As for a bump, the panel found that Maynard did not attempt to bump Brayshaw.

“In order for it to be concluded that he engaged in the act of bumping,” Gleeson said.

“It would be necessary to find that he formed that intention when in midair at approximately at the apex of his leap.

“We accept the evidence of Professor Cole (biomechanist) as being consistent with a common sense viewing of the video evidence. Maynard had no time to form that intention.

Maynard was cleared for the hit. Photo: Fox Sports

Maynard was referred directly to the Tribunal under Kane’s name, rather than the usual process of the Match Review Officer Michael Christian making the charge, with Christian believing Maynard had no case to answer – a belief he was willing to quit over.

The Tribunal of Jeff Gleeson KC, Scott Stevens and Darren Gaspar found that while Maynard may have expected some impact when he left the ground, the violence of the impact could not be foreseen.

Gleeson said that they also took on board the evidence of professor Michael Cole, who claimed: “Once airborne, Maynard had no opportunity to avoid the collision.”

The marathon hearing went for over four hours with three hours of submissions before an hour of deliberations.

Before going for deliberations, Gleeson made sure the gravity of the situation was established.

“I make absolutely no apologies for the fact that this has taken nearly three hours,” he said.

“A footballer was concussed and stretchered from the MCG in a final, another footballer has got a couple of pretty important games he’ll either play in or miss depending in part on what we decide tonight.

“As importantly as any of that, there are footballers playing today, next year and in the decades to come who need to understand the basis on which this decision was made and the basis on which we approach these matters generally.”

Brayshaw was knocked out cold for two minutes. Photo by Dylan Burns/AFL Photos via Getty Images

6.59pm — The Tribunal begin deliberations

It’s been three hours of arguments but now the Tribunal is making its deliberations.

Before he left, Gleeson said that the panel would not consider the conversation surrounding the drama and would be focusing on purely on the evidence.

By the sounds of it, this could take a while.

6.55pm — AFL, Collingwood sum up their submissions

The AFL is seemingly suggesting that if it’s not careless conduct, it should be considered a bump, and vice versa.

Maynard’s representative Ihle said that: “The bump provision only applies in circumstances where there’s been a decision to bump. It was not put to him that he intended to bump and had the time to form that intention. These are significant omissions.”

Ihle also pointed back to the expert’s assertion that the jump was more vertical than forward, he suggested that Maynard jumped “no more than one or two metres … that’s a stride length.”

Ihle’s continued in a lengthy submission to argue that it wasn’t Maynard who ran in front of Brayshaw, but the other way around.

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

It’s directly opposing to the AFL’s argument that Maynard took out Brayshaw with a careless action.

Ihle has been speaking for the best part of an hour and claimed the entire case comes down to “0.12 to 0.15 seconds”.

The footage contended that Maynard touched the ball at 0.24 seconds after he left the ground, saw Brayshaw moving towards him at 0.44 seconds and the collision took place at 0.56 seconds.

“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.

Ihle said the case risked being “heavily encrusted with hindsight bias that it doesn’t do justice to the realities of playing our game”.

He added that it was “unfortunate”, “an accident” and “not unreasonable conduct”.

5.32pm — Expert: ‘no opportunity to avoid the collision’

Biomechanist Michael Cole, who is an expert in neuromuscular control, is talking through his report.

He claimed: “Once airborne, Maynard had no opportunity to avoid the collision.”

He added that the reaction time for a regular person in a controlled setting is approximately 200-250 milliseconds, while a young athlete would be 25 per cent faster for single decisions, and 20 per cent for choices.

Cole also suggested that between Brayshaw kicking and impact, he had made an estimate that it was 400 milliseconds.

The biomechanist added that there was a very limited chance that Maynard would be able to consciously change his body position.

“I do not believe Maynard’s body position at the time of impact can be considered part of any conscious decision,” Cole said.

He added that while he couldn’t conclusively say one way or the other that it was a conscious thought to make the call but that it was his best conclusion based on the numbers and research.

However, he added that Maynard had no more than 400 milliseconds to respond and that the 200-250 millisecond time would be would be “impossible to achieve in a competitive arena”.

Ihle asked if the 200-250 millisecond reaction time was in a laboratory setting, which Cole confirmed.

Cole added that once Maynard jumped, he was “essentially a projectile”, “like a frisbee with arms and legs”.

5.11pm — ‘Conduct was unreasonable’: AFL’s submission

AFL counsel Andrew Woods said the league was arguing that the incident was “unreasonable in the circumstances”.

“This type of contact isn’t common,” he said. “Leaping forward in the air with force to an opponent running in the opposite direction holds a key risk of badly injuring their opponent. It’s a dangerous action to undertake and it breaches the duty of care owed to the other player.”

He argued that players need to take into account whether they’re risking the safety of the other player whether they undertake something such as a smother so as they’re “not going to unreasonably risk the safety of the other player”.

“Unlike in the ancient game of AFL football, there are times in the modern game where you do have to pull your punches,” Woods said.

He also argued that Maynard should have jumped more upright, rather than running towards Brayshaw.

Woods also argued that if he didn’t turn his shoulder, it logically would have reduced the impact.

He also said that players in this situation may need to realised that it’s too unsafe to jump with his forward momentum.

Gleeson suggested that if Maynard didn’t move to brace himself, his knees or elbows or other limbs may have contacted.

Woods said: “If he doesn’t turn, there probably would’ve been a reportable offence, but it would reduce the carelessness.”

4.35pm — ‘S**t, he’s there’: Maynard fronts tribunal

The hearing has begun with Brayden Maynard fronting the tribunal and giving his side of the story.

Asked he expected Brayshaw to be directly in front of him, Maynard said “absolutely not”.

Maynard said he came in and that Brayshaw was to his right but when he looked back after the smother, Brayshaw was in front of him.

He said he didn’t expect Brayshaw to move in the way he did after kicking the ball.

“I saw Angus Brayshaw come out of the front of the stoppage and running towards me,” Maynard said.

“I decided to come forward, but as you can see, I jumped straight in the air.

“I do recall making contact with the ball to smother it.

“I had to jump in the air to try and touch the ball. I jumped off two feet, straight in the air.

“When I jumped, I was looking at the football the whole time.

“When I was in the air and smothering the ball, I looked at the football, felt like I made connection, then turned my head to land and ‘s**t, he was there’.

“It was a surprise he had come into my way.

“It was almost like a flinch reaction. I seized up.

“Next thing I know he was on the floor and I was a bit rattled myself.”

Brayden Maynard has given his side of the evidence. Photo: Fox Footy and Getty Images

AFL counsel Andrew Woods showed vision of the incident which showed the incident.

He said he believed Maynard and Brayshaw were directly opposite.

Woods said that Maynard left the ground almost as he kicked the ball but that Maynard didn’t jump straight up and down, but that he was also jumping forward, which Maynard agreed was with some momentum.

He asked if it was “clear to you that you were going to collide hard with Brayshaw?”

Maynard: “No. I did not know what was going to happen after I went to make a football act.”

He was asked if instead of turning his body on Brayshaw he could have stretched his arms out like he was smothering or whether he could have wrapped his arms around Brayshaw.

Maynard said “no” to both suggestions.

Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson questioned Maynard, saying that Woods argued that he should have shown more care in the way he jumped and the way he braced himself.

Asked if he knew what happened if he did get a smother and Maynard said he didn’t know.

Asked if he changed his approach while in the air, Maynard said that the speed of the action meant there was nothing he could do to avoid the collision.

“With all due respect, the same outcome would’ve happened,” Maynard said. “When I went to smother the ball, it was a flinch reaction. Like I said, he was in my way and a collision occurred.

And if he left his arms out? “I feel the same outcomes would have happened because it was a collision, it happened very quickly,” Maynard said.

Maynard said he didn’t believe that there would be a collision because “I didn’t see him coming down the same line as me, he was to the right of me.

“I just sort of flinched and tensed up. I thought, ‘Aww s**t’.”

3pm – Tribunal prepares for landmark case

Maynard’s bump on Brayshaw has been graded as careless conduct, severe impact and high contact – if proven, it will generally result in a minimum three match ban, which will rule him out of the preliminary final, and a potential Grand Final.

He will either need to plead not guilty and prove that the offence was not made out, or successfully downgrade the offence to at least medium severity (or low impact if he argues that the conduct was intentional) to play again this season.

The Tribunal does, in “exceptional and compelling circumstances” retain the power to impose or withhold sanctions at its direction, and given the unique nature of the case, could be an avenue for Collingwood’s legal team to pursue.

Given the general legality of attempts to smother, the case serves as a landmark test case for the boundaries of acts that are generally considered legal, but that have consequences especially relating to concussion and head trauma that the AFL wants to crack down on.

While there have been a number of cases in 2023 under a fresh crackdown on high contact that dealt with bumps, this is the first that has dealt with an incident where the aim of the defender was not to dispossess the ball, or was bumping in lieu of a tackle.

Maynard’s hit sparked a brawl at the MCG while Brayshaw lay unconscious. (Photo by Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images)

Maynard’s matter will be heard by Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson KC, Scott Stevens and Darren Gaspar.

Gleeson has been a barrister in Victoria since 1992, and took silk in 2007, while Loewe was a two-time all-Australian centre half-forward who formed a lethal partnership with Tony Lockett at St Kilda in the 1990s, kicking 594 goals.

Stevens played 144 games and kicked 82 goals for the Sydney Swanas and Adelaide Crows between 2002 and 2011 but is also legally trained and admitted to practice.

Gaspar is a two-time all-Australian for Sydney and Richmond.

He played started his career at the Swans where he played 21 games, before playing 207 games for the Tigers between 1996 and 2007, where he was also named the club’s best and fairest in 2001.

In the event that Collingwood and Maynard are unhappy with the outcome, they have the option of appealing the decision to the AFL Appeals Board, chaired by former judge Murray Kellam KC.

Fox Sports’ David Zita reported that the AFL will argue Maynard turning his body mid-air to brace was “in the bumping of an opponent”, and that he subsequently, having “elected to bump” (a doctrine the AFL has developed since 2011), he had a duty of care to Brayshaw that he failed to uphold.

Zita said that Collingwood had two arguments that could be put to the Tribunal – either that Maynard was contesting the ball and that it was reasonable to contest the ball in that way, or that Brayshaw’s failure to protect himself is something Maynard could not control and could not reasonably foresee.

12pm – Brayshaw back at training

Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin said on Tuesday his star midfielder had improved in recent days.

Brayshaw was embraced by his teammates on the training track at Casey Fields and ran some laps in a positive sign.

But whether Brayshaw could return for a preliminary final or face a longer absence from the game remains to be decided, with Goodwin telling reporters the Demons would be extremely cautious due to his history of head knocks.

“ (Brayshaw) is progressing well, clearly he’s in the protocols and there’s more checks that need to be done,” Goodwin said.

“We certainly won’t take a risk with him as a player … there’s a big picture to think of here with Angus, and we’ve just got to make sure that everything is done properly. His health is paramount in this situation.”

Brayshaw returned to training on light duties on Tuesday. Photo by Michael Klein.

Angus Brayshaw of the Demons is being cleaned up by Brayden Maynard of the Magpies during the qualifying final between Collingwood and Melbourne at the MCG. Photo: Fox Sports

10am – Minister weighs in

The furore has even taken in NDIS Minister and Member for Maribrynong, Bill Shorten.

Shorten, whose electorate borders Collingwood heartland in Wills and who is a diehard Magpies fan, appeared on Sky News to discuss the issue ahead of the hearing.

Shorten expressed his sympathies with the concussed Brayshaw but said Maynard had a reputation for fairness.

“I feel for Angus Brayshaw, that’s obviously very bad to have that injury, but the fellow in question seems to have a pretty good reputation around the place of being a fair player,” Shorten said.

“You got me commenting on the issue … politicians should stay out of it, we will leave it for the Tribunal, but go Pies.”

8am – Hamish Brayshaw hits out

Former West Coast Eagles player and Brayshaw’s brother Hamish said he expected Maynard to get off scot-free, owing to a desire from AFL House for Collingwood to win their third premiership since 1958.

“It will set a precedent for what is going to happen for a long time in football I think, whether he gets off or whether he doesn’t,” Brayshaw said on the Shelter FootyCast alongside former West Coast star Will Schofield and commentator Mark Readings.

“I think if this happened in Round 3, sweet no worries mate you’ve got weeks. The scrutiny comes under the fact that I think the AFL are desperate for Collingwood to win a premiership.

“They want the supporters to go nuts, they’ve got 106,000 members, they want to do everything they can, in my opinion, for that to happen.

“The world wants to see that happen, or the Collingwood fans do anyway and they have a very loud voice so a lot of that is driven by the Collingwood fans and I think a few people at the AFL who want to see Collingwood win.

“But duty of care for a player, whether that comes into account, I don’t know.”