The Cripps decision is a win for the Blues and a loss for the game

The incident involving Carlton skipper Patrick Cripps, that left the Brisbane Lions’ Callum Ah Chee concussed, should not have left anyone with any doubt about what an AFL player can or can’t do on the field.

There is no confusion that what happened warranted a suspension.

Patrick Cripps bumps Callum Ah Chee.Credit: Fox Footy

The tribunal came to that conclusion on Tuesday night when the chair asked both parties at that hearing whether a player could bump and contest the ball, and the answer was yes.

This made the reason why Cripps received a two-match suspension clear, whether you liked it or not: he made a split second decision to turn his body while contesting the ball which caused him to bump Ah Chee, an act which left the Lions defender concussed.

Ah Chee was vulnerable as he approached the ball, and unclear of what was behind him. Cripps was reckless enough in his attack on the ball that it was reasonable for the match review officer and tribunal to conclude that if it hits like a bump, it is a bump, regardless of whether Cripps’ eyes were on the ball.

They determined that he could have contested the ball without bumping - however unpalatable that may seem to some - thus keeping his act within the rules of the game in this era where protection of the head has a high priority.

Patrick Cripps had his two-match ban overturned on appeal.Credit: Getty Images

Although a tad unfortunate, as the ball spiked from Daniel Rich’s fist like an aggressive dog hearing noise behind a fence, and Cripps decided to take Ah Chee’s body and contest the ball.

The real confusion is how that the process wasn’t robust enough for that decision to stand, with the judicial process in place giving Cripps another opportunity to frame a sustainable argument to enable him to play against Melbourne on Saturday night, and remain in contention for the Brownlow Medal, for which he is one of the favourites.

At the Blues’ final attempt, Chris Townshend QC, a former board member at the Blues, expertly framed an argument to get Cripps’ ban overturned on what the appeals board said was procedural fairness.

Turn it up.

The appeals board should be a place to rectify howlers, not clear players on procedural fairness grounds because allowing the tribunal decision to be overturned on that basis doesn’t serve the game’s interests.

It not only led to an inappropriate outcome for a competition looking to address head injuries by treading the tightrope of changing behaviour while maintaining the game’s physicality, it added another legalistic layer to the tribunal’s deliberations.

What is clear from the drawn-out legal drama is that while we are all certain how far clubs are prepared to go to give their best players a chance to play important games, no one in the game is now certain exactly what needs to be done to ensure the judicial process protects the heads of players.

That’s why the decision has serious implications for the rules and the game’s judicial process.

The AFL has let the verdict stand but has said they will not hesitate to change the system or the regulations if needed when they are reviewed at the end of the season.

It should make changes that guard against this happening again, streamlining the system to find the proper balance between common-sense and legal argument.

So while the Lions’ Ah Chee sits out the vital game against St Kilda on Friday night, Cripps, a much-admired player, sits at home preparing for one of the most important matches of his 157-game career.

That’s a win for the Blues, but a temporary loss for the game.

The system needs adjusting, otherwise the game’s headaches will only become larger.

Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.