The AFL world will be up in arms again as two three-game bans for dangerous tackles have been upheld at the Tribunal. Live updates below!
The AFL handed down a massive 10 weeks worth of suspensions from Round 18, with the Charlie Cameron and Toby Bedford sanctions seeing Brisbane great Jonathan Brown expressing concerns for the “fabric of the game”.
But Cameron and Bedford’s suspensions were both upheld in another reminder of the strict sanctions looming for incidents resulting in concussion.
Watch every game of every round this Toyota AFL Premiership Season LIVE with no ad-breaks during play on Kayo. New to Kayo? Start your free trial today >
Gold Coast’s Alex Davies is appealing a forceful front-on contact ban to end the night.
Cameron’s Tribunal defence revealed | 03:13
CAMERON HEARING
Charlie Cameron has failed to overturn his three-game dangerous tackle ban at the AFL Tribunal.
The star Brisbane forward tried to argue his driving tackle which concussed West Coast’s Liam Duggan was reasonable, claiming Duggan was to blame for the backward momentum.
However the Tribunal found Cameron acted unreasonably and drove Duggan forcefully backwards, holding the arms which meant Duggan could not cushion his landing.
Cameron will miss games against Sydney, Gold Coast and St Kilda.
The Match Review Officer graded it as careless conduct, severe impact and high contact.
It came after Cameron controversially escaped suspension for “exemplary record and character” for a tackle on Jake Lever back in Round 5.
The Lions pled not guilty to rough conduct arguing Cameron’s actions were not unreasonable.
The Eagles’ medical report said Duggan will miss at least one game but the full timeline is to be determined.
Cameron said he had the options to either bump or tackle, and chose to tackle.
Adrian Anderson for the Lions said Duggan’s feet became tangled with Cameron’s feet as the forward attempted to wrap up his opponent.
“What we get taught at footy training is trying to get in tight to the ball carrier and try and wrap your arms around him,” Cameron said.
“I’m just trying to hold him up and control the tackle. When you’re out there, you’re trying to fight (him) as well … I’m trying to stand up.”
Cameron said he didn’t have his feet under him because of how Duggan fought the tackle, which made him unbalanced.
“He rotates his body and twists, so he’s dragging me down when we get our feet tangled and I lost my balance,” Cameron said.
“You can see him dropping his knees and rotating … I’ve got no control, I’ve only got control of him. He’s dragging me to the ground. I felt like he has created the backward momentum.”
Lisa Hannon for the AFL argued Cameron “could’ve tried to pull or sit him (Duggan) down” early in the tackle before Cameron took three more steps before they ended up on the ground, with Cameron insisting he was just trying to stand Duggan up.
Hannon suggested as they were going to ground Cameron should’ve released Duggan’s right arm.
“I’m just trying to complete a tackle and not let him dispose of the ball. That’s my job, to complete a tackle,” Cameron said.
The pair were also in dispute over how much control Cameron had in the situation.
Asked by his lawyer how reasonable it would be for players to be expected to let go of players whenever they’re falling to the ground, Cameron said: “If I let him go and don’t make a tackle, I’d be in trouble … it’s not a good look defensively.”
The AFL argued Cameron “drove Duggan backwards with excessive force” and “it was forseeable the tackle could cause forceful impact to Mr Duggan’s head”.
They argued Cameron could’ve released Duggan’s right arm – and it was not realistic to suggest, as Cameron did, that Duggan could’ve run off if he did this during the tackle – or slowed the tackle, trying to sit him down.
“The fact Cameron’s foot may’ve become entangled with Duggan’s was entirely foreseeable and not an exceptional circumstance in a close up tackle,” Hannon said.
But Anderson argued: “He (Duggan) wasn’t driven, he fell down in the tackle and he wasn’t rotated by Cameron.”
Their reasons the tackle wasn’t unreasonable were:
1. Cameron made the right decision to tackle, not bump;
2 and 3. He was trying to do the right thing by standing up in the tackle. Had his foot not been taken from under him, it would’ve been a safe tackle;
4. There was no need for him to have ‘sat down’ in tackle (as AFL suggested), he was trying to stand up;
5. Releasing the right arm (as the AFL suggested) would’ve made no difference.
But on the arm argument, Hannon said we would never know the result, and the decision to hold onto it cannot be ignored.
Cameron reasons
We find that in tackling his opponent in the way he did, Cameron engaged in rough conduct.
Almost immediately after Duggan picked up the ball, Cameron ran to Duggan and wrapped his arms around him in a tackle.
He had both of Duggan’s arms pinned and the ball was locked in between them.
Contrary to Cameron’s evidence, we consider the vision clearly captures Cameron taking Duggan to ground.
He used the right side of his body to forcefully drive Duggan backwards. Duggan managed to avoid being immediately driven to the ground by taking a few steps backwards and turning to the side. However, under the continued force being applied, Duggan then lost his feet and landed heavily on his back with his head hitting the ground.
It is the combination of the excessive force used in driving Duggan backwards with both of his arms pinned that makes the tackle unreasonable in the circumstances.
Those two features put Duggan in a highly vulnerable position. He had no opportunity to try to protect himself. If he wasn’t driven backwards with such force, then there would have been opportunity for him to try to control the way he landed.
If his arms weren’t held, then there would have been opportunity for him to try to use an arm or shoulder to cushion his landing.
For these reasons, we uphold the charge.
BEDFORD HEARING
Toby Bedford failed to overturn his three-game suspension for a chase-down tackle on Tigers star Tim Taranto, who exited Sunday’s clash at the MCG in the fourth term with concussion.
The Giants tagger immediately tackled Taranto from behind after a ruck contest and drove the midfielder into the ground with both arms pinned.
It was graded as careless conduct, severe impact and high contact.
The Giants, represented by Anais d’Arville challenged the careless grading – trying to get the charge thrown out entirely – and if the Tribunal disagreed they argued the impact should be medium or high instead.
The Tigers’ medical report said Taranto was treated for concussion and will follow the protocols causing him to miss at least one match.
Bedford said he leapt for Taranto to try and stop him as quickly as possible, telling the Tribunal: “He had a metre or so on me. I leap for him as he grabs the ball and then kind of just hold on.”
Because of that metre Bedford said he did not have another way to tackle Taranto and the arms were “the first things I could grab onto”, arguing he did not control the direction of the tackle.
“I had no force, I was trying just to hold onto him,” Bedford said.
“I don’t think I had enough time to let go at all, it happened in a split-second.
“I thought I’d executed it (the tackle) perfectly.”
Bedford argued the momentum took them both to the ground while Lisa Hannon argued for the AFL Bedford did not need to dive – and was less able to control the tackle because of the dive.
“I think I was just more worried about him getting rid of the ball before that … he probably would’ve got the tackle out if I didn’t do it,” Bedford said.
He argued even if he’d let go of Taranto’s arms, Taranto wouldn’t have had time to brace his impact.
Hannon: “You could’ve released his left arm once he starts falling?”
Bedford: (laughs) “It was very quick, I didn’t even think of that, it was so quick in the game.”
The AFL argued Bedford drove Taranto into the ground with excessive force, and the diving motion “adds to the inherent risk with the tackle” because he had less control.
They said he could have kept his feet and stayed more upright in the tackle, taking another step or two, and that he could’ve released one of Taranto’s arms.
The Giants said Bedford was faced with the choice of tackling the way that he did, or not tackling at all, and that concussion is relevant to the impact grading but a concussion being the effect cannot always mean the impact is severe.
D’Arville argued it was clear from Bedford’s evidence there was no other way to complete the tackle, and releasing the arms was “just not possible”.
He also argued because Bedford is “the only forward in the top 20 of the AFL for tackles” his evidence should be given extra weight.
The Giants cited other tackles, including the AFLW Dee Heslop on Rhiannon Watt tackle, as clear examples of what severe impact really represented. They pointed to Jaeger O’Meara on Charlie Spargo as a comparable example of medium impact though AFL Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson said the injury suffered mattered.
Gleeson said it was a “surprising criticism” more broadly that the injury resulting from an incident would impact the sanction.
The AFL disputed this tackle was extraordinary in any way.
Tribunal reasons
We find that this tackle was rough conduct. A reasonable player in Bedford’s circumstances would have realised that by leaping at Taranto in the way that he did from behind, he was likely to drive him into the ground.
A reasonable player would have realised Taranto was in a vulnerable position and was being driven into the ground with force, and that Toronto’s head may well hit the ground with force.
A reasonable player would have released at least one of Taronto’s arms to enable him to attempt to brace for impact.
We find that this may well have meaningfully reduced the impact. As it was, the impact was severe.
DAVIES HEARING
The Suns were handed two suspensions, to Alex Davies (three games, forceful front-on contact) and Malcolm Rosas Jr. (one match, striking).
Davies, playing his first AFL game since Round 11, was banned for colliding with Port Adelaide’s Lachie Jones in Sunday’s match at People First Stadium.
The Suns midfielder charged at Jones when he went down to pick up the ball and made high contact with him. Jones was eventually subbed out of the game with concussion.
The Suns are expected to argue Davies was contesting the ball and the ball bobbled away from Jones, seeing the Power player expose his head as he reached his arms forward.
It was graded as careless conduct, severe impact and high contact.
Tribunal hearing times (AEST, estimated)
Charlie Cameron: 4pm
Toby Bedford: 6:30pm
Alex Davies: 7:45pm
Follow live updates in our Tribunal blog below!