Add Category
West Coast forward Willie Rioli has been found not guilty of rough conduct at a marathon AFL Tribunal hearing.
Key points:
- The Tribunal found Willie Rioli did not "change his intention to contest the ball" in a contest with Matt Rowell
- Rory Sloane referenced previous eye injuries of his own in his defence for making contact with Blake Acres'
- Mitch Robinson was unable to overturn a charge for making forceful front-on contact to Xavier Duursma
Earlier, Rory Sloane's testimony and his extensive history of eye and facial injuries have helped save the Adelaide captain from his own one-week AFL suspension. But Brisbane's Mitch Robinson had his ban upheld.
Rioli made his comeback in Sunday's loss to Gold Coast after serving a two-year ban for doping violations, but his bump on Suns young gun Matt Rowell earned him a one-game ban.
The Eagles successfully argued Rioli was going for the mark before bracing for contact at the last moment.
While the tribunal disagreed with West Coast and found it was high contact, it sided with Rioli after deliberating for more than half an hour.
"Incidents such as this, where the question revolves whether and how the player is contesting the ball, are not easy," Gleeson said.
"This tribunal will be astute to uphold any charge where a player was initially intending to contest the ball, but changed that intention and in doing so, breached his duty of care.
"That is not this case."
Loading
Sloane successfully argued his charge of making contact to the eye region of Fremantle utility Blake Acres should be downgraded from intentional to careless.
That meant his penalty went from a one-game ban to a $2,000 fine, meaning he will play against Collingwood on Saturday at the MCG.
Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson QC referred directly to Sloane's evidence when explaining the jury's verdict.
He added while the vision suggested Sloane's contact to Acres' eye area was intentional, several factors also went in favour of the Adelaide player, including his awkward position after tackling the Dockers player.
Acres also suffered no injury in the incident.
"He was clear, forthright and adamant that he did not intend to contact the eye region," Gleeson said.
The Crows acknowledged the incident was low impact and high contact, but were adamant it was not intentional.
In his evidence, Sloane detailed his own history of facial and eye injuries because of football, including a detached retina last year that had the potential to end his career.
"I'm very aware of what even just a little scratch in the eye can do, even just a poke," he said.
"There's no way I'd go after anyone's eye because I'm very aware of the damage it can cause.
"I was super close to being finished in football and close to losing my eyesight so there's no way I'd go near anyone's eye."
Brisbane failed to overturn Robinson's one-game ban for forceful front-on contact against Port Adelaide's Xavier Duursma.
Duursma suffered a collarbone injury and is no certainty to play in round two.
Look back at how it unfolded in our live blog.
Live updates
By Dean Bilton
That's it from the Tribunal tonight
A marathon night for our friends at the AFL Tribunal. In the end Rory Sloane and Willie Rioli earn reprieves, while Mitch Robinson isn't so lucky.
The debate will continue, but that's where we leave the blog. Thanks for your company tonight.
By Dean Bilton
Mitch Robinson's suspension is upheld
By Dean Bilton
Verdict pending
The Rioli case took about 40 minutes to be reached, let's see how this one goes.
By Dean Bilton
Nick Pane responding
Pane says the push from McStay had no real impact on the positioning or movement of Duursma.
By Dean Bilton
Handran showing some still images
He says Duursma is running towards the boundary line, and without the push from McStay would have been clear of Robinson. He says Robinson was in no position to be able to foresee Duursma's sudden change of direction.
Handran says Robinson is taken as much by surprise as Duursma. At the moment Duursma is pushed in his direction, Robinson turns his body infield to avoid more severe contact with Duursma's head.
He says Robinson had 80 milliseconds to react to Duursma's sudden change of direction.
By Dean Bilton
More from Handran
He says again that Duursma was propelled into Robinson, who stopped and reacted as well as anyone could be expected to to avoid significant impact to Duursma.
He points to the lead-up play, in which players and the ball are pushing and bouncing off one another.
Handran stops the frame with the ball in between Duursma and Robinson. He says at that moment, Duursma is no more likely to win the ball than Robinson.
He says the ball then bounces up favourably for Duursma, at which point McStay "shoves" Duursma. Duursma gathers the ball a split second before impact with Robinson, who has held his position and is "helpless".
Handran says if the ball hadn't bounced the way it did, Duursma would be the one "sitting in the chair" in front of the Tribunal.
By Dean Bilton
Gavin Handran states Robinson's case
Handran says Duursma "cannoned" into Robinson, and Robinson had no realistic alternative action.
What alternative does the AFL rely on? There was no occasion for Robinson to corral Duursma. You will appreciate that Duursma wins possession of the football and only looks likely to do so at the last split second. There's no occasion to corral a player without possession of the ball.
He wins possession at the same split second he was pushed into Robinson. There is objective support for Robinson's assertion that had Robinson stayed upright and stationary, the result for Duursma would have been much worse.
This action was nothing more than we see every week when courageous players contest the football. The AFL keeps record of contested possessions. The game is built on courage. Robinson took steps to protect Duursma, only to find himself in front of the Tribunal. There was nothing that occured that was careless.
Otherwise, if a player competes for a contested possession, and misses the moment by a split second, the player will take on strict liability.
By Dean Bilton
Pane continues
He is running through the classifications of "medium impact" and "high contact", which are fairly cut and dry given the injury suffered by Duursma and the fact contact was made above the shoulder.
The question he is asking to the Tribunal is if Robinson engaged in unreasonable rough conduct.
By Dean Bilton
AFL counsel Nick Pane states his case
He says the vision clearly shows Robinson making front on contact to Duursma while Duursma had his head over the ball.
Pane asks if it was reasonable for Robinson to contest the ball he way he did, considering the position of Duursma.
My submission is Duursma bends over to pick up the ball as Robinson approaches from the other direction. Robinson sets himself and could move in either direction. Robinson is aware that Duursma is in that position when he takes a step forward and chooses to bump Duursma.
Robinson had the option to limit impact by staying upright and choosing to corral rather than bump.
By Dean Bilton
Pane again asks if Robinson could have corralled Duursma
Robinson says had he stood up and not braced, the result would have been much worse for Duursma. He says there was no need for corralling when the ball in disupte, and by the time Duursma got the ball all he could do was brace to avoid severe contact.
By Dean Bilton
Nick Pane is questioning Robinson
Pane is suggesting that when Robinson paused and held his arms out, he had the option of corralling of Duursma. Robinson says Duursma was not in the play at that point.
Robinson says the speed with which Duursma surprised him. He says the footage shows McStay pushed Duursma towards him (I guess that's where the bench press stuff comes in).
Pane asks Robinson if he accepts that at the point of impact, he was front-on with Duursma. Robinson does not accept that.
By Dean Bilton
Robinson on the aftermath
Footage shows Robinson holding his hands up immediately after the contact. He says that was to make clear it wasn't his intention to make that sort of contact with Duursma.
By Dean Bilton
Robinson talks through the incident
He says he started by holding his arms out to slow his momentum so he could read the play as the ball approached.
A frame later, Robinson says he feels like the ball is about to bounce towards the boundary, and he may be able to win it, but he hasn't yet decided to contest the ball.
A moment later, Robinson identifies the ball is in dispute. He says his job is to come towards the footy, and he thought the ball was coming towards him.
Robinson says he then thought Duursma was going to take the ball over the boundary, so he had to contest it.
Next, he says he was unlucky the ball bounced up to Duursma. Robinson says he then braced to protect himself from impact from Duursma. He says his objective is to get himself safe and to avoid hitting Duursma's head.
Robinson says he turned his body, because he had he stayed in his initial position he would have hit Duursma in the head. Robinson said Duursma was diving towards him a millisecond before they made contact.
In my professional opinion, there was nothing else I could do. Without bragging, I thought I did a good job of turning to avoid hitting him in the head. I thought I did a good job.
By Dean Bilton
Robinson's counsel Gavin Handran is here
He is sitting in front of a remarkable bookshelf. Handran has called on Robinson to give evidence.
Robinson is asked what his reaction time is now compared to when he first came into the league. He says his reaction time is similar, and his instinct for the game is now better.
He is asked Dan McStay's height, weight and bench press numbers.
"He can bench 125kg, and I can do better. I can do 135."
By Dean Bilton
Medical record being called upon
AFL counsel Nick Pane is detailing the injury suffered by Xavier Duursma. He was taken from the field and did not take any further part in the game. There was no fracture to his collarbone. He will miss a minimum of four days' training and it's not yet been determined if he will miss any games.
By Dean Bilton
Mitch Robinson case coming up
I'm sure the socials will be ablaze with that Rioli news, but for now we move on to Robinson's case.
He was charged with making front-on contact to Xavier Duursma. It was graded as careless conduct, medium impact and high contact.
By Dean Bilton
Willie Rioli's suspension is overturned
The tribunal was not satisfied he engaged in rough conduct. They said he was making a legitimate attempt on the ball until the final moment, and was not unreasonable in his actions.
They did, out of a point of interest, rule the impact was high.
By Dean Bilton
Still waiting...
Not surprised it's taking a bit longer, it's not an easy one for the tribunal. Jeffery Gleeson, David Neitz and Shane Wakelin make up the panel tonight.
By Dean Bilton
Still waiting...
A reminder Mitch Robinson's case will be heard after this one.
By Dean Bilton
Verdict pending
Might take a little while, this one. The judiciary will consider the matter.