Carlton captain Patrick Cripps was hit with a two-week suspension for his head-high hit on Brisbane’s Callum Ah Chee on Sunday.
The Blues midfielder collected the Lion’s head with his shoulder when attempting to win an aerial ball in the first quarter at the Gabba. The contact resulted in concussion for Ah Chee which prompted him to be subbed out of the game.
It was a similar instance to that of West Coast’s Willie Rioli who collected Gold Coast’s Matt Rowell in a marking contest earlier in the year, although the Suns midfielder was not concussed.
Rioli was eventually found not guilty of rough conduct after initially receiving a one-match ban.
Carlton has since confirmed they will contest the Cripps charge at the AFL Tribunal.
Nathan Buckley has commented on the situation, understanding both sides of the ledger.
He still sees contesting a loose ball as part of the game but does admit there are risks involved and the adjudication of the law in this instance is correct.
“I have many different trains of thought going on. I actually think that the contest is something that I reckon is a part of the game,” he said on SEN’s Whateley.
“I think that Patty Cripps was well within his rights to go and win the ball. I also believe that there was a part of him that wanted to make a statement and that there was a physical contest to be a part of and that he would have thought, in his mind, that he was attacking the football and collecting a Brisbane Lions player at the same time.
“If that’s in his duty of care, then I think that he’s probably fudged that line a little bit to try and make a stand in the status of the game. The same way Michael Voss would have, the same way Leigh Matthews would have, the same way Jonathan Brown would have, who happen to be three ex-players - Vossy has skin in the game - who immediately said that the contest is a football action.
“I think I can see that side of it, but the way that the legislation is written about carelessness and recklessness, I wasn’t surprised by the adjudication that came down.”
Patrick Cripps and Callum Ah Chee were involved in this collision during the second quarter.#AFLLionsBlues pic.twitter.com/jTCUvHENKI
— AFL (@AFL) August 7, 2022
Was there an alternative way to go about the contest?
Collingwood champion Buckley does have reservations about the aspect of not competing for the ball which threatens the spirit of the game from a playing sense.
He suggests the Blues might just be successful in having the two-week ban overturned.
“There weren’t many alternative ways to contest the football. There were plenty of alternative ways to not contest the football,” Buckley replied.
“That is the issue that I have. That is for players to be clear of this careless, reckless stamp that’s put on some of these contests, even some of the tackles that we’re seeing, under the guise of protecting the head. Which I understand and accept, but we are playing a contact game.
“To absolve yourself of the carelessness and recklessness that sometimes is brought down by a tribunal to explain its decisions, you actually have to not compete. And to not compete, I think, is taking away the essence of the game.
“This one is very similar to Willie Rioli in that sense. The difference between marking and winning possession is moot. There is a precedent there and Carlton have every right to go with that precedent.
“If that (the Rioli appeal) was successful, there’s a very real possibility that Carton could be as well.”
Geelong star and AFLPA president Patrick Dangerfield looked at the incident through both a Players’ Association off-field lens as well as the view of a player in the heat of the moment.
“I understand, certainly from a PA point of view, around health and safety, around concussion and how important those markers are,” he said.
“But then as a player, purely as a player, you look at it - and I know the goalposts have shifted, certainly in my time in the game - but you do empathise.
“This is not taking away from the victim, but you do empathise with the players in this situation where the ball is there and you feel like you’re going to do everything to put yourself in that contest. Then for a split second it’s just a little bit later than what you think and then you brace and then the resulting contact.
“It’s been pretty clear from what we’ve seen from past incidents around what the ramifications will be and it has generally been a suspension. But it doesn’t take away from how difficult the game is to play. In a split second, in a split moment, when at the time Carlton’s getting hammered and you need a moment to get your team back in the game as captain, and that’s the moment.”
Dangerfield believes the suspension will stay, whether it remains at two weeks or is cut to one.
“You don’t condone the head-high contact but you understand it is part of the game at different stages,” he added.
“It promises to be a really interesting one, I think.
“Does he escape suspension? It’s difficult given what we’ve seen from the previous examples, but it isn’t without precedence given what we saw with Willie Rioli.
“Correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t think Matthew Rowell was concussed, so perhaps that’s the big change there.”
Cripps’ case will be heard on Tuesday night.