Following Saturday’s sickening collision between Fremantle giant Aaron Sandilands and courageous Crow Phil Davis, this Monday’s Match Review Panel will take on added interest for the average fan as the ‘bump’ issue rears its head again.
Those watching the Fremantle-Adelaide match on Saturday would’ve been left stunned when 211cm, 123kg Sandilands cannoned into Davis at full speed late in the second term, leaving the Crow concussed on the Footy Park turf.
It was a brutal collision which left Davis completely out of it and in need of a stretcher. Reports from the changerooms said even by the final quarter, Davis still didn’t know who and where he was.
Interestingly, though, following the incident there was little retaliation from the Crows players, while the parochial Adelaide crowd paid little attention to booing Sandilands.
It’s fair to say there was little malice in the collision.
It was a marking contest, where Davis had courageously, but blindly, backed into Sandilands’ path. The big Freo ruckman did little wrong, except be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Nevertheless, the incident will inevitably come under the scrutiny of the Match Review Panel on Monday night, along with a few curious other bumps this weekend from Geelong’s Corey Enright and Carlton’s Jarrad Waite.
The outcomes of all three incidents will be monitored closely, as we try to make sense of the illegal bump interpretation which has troubled AFL footy in recent times.
But the Sandilands-Davis collision will take on greatest interest, as it was an incident which appeared unavoidable. On the other hand, it was brutal, leaving Davis with concussion.
Head injuries like this are the exact reason why the AFL changed its interpretation on legal and illegal bumps. After all, players getting concussed on a weekly basis is a bad image for the game.
Under the current interpretation, players can be charged with ‘rough conduct’ if forceful contact is made to another player’s head, accidentally or not, while bumping.
The wording of that criteria is damning for Sandilands, as unfair as that seems.
Fremantle may argue Sandilands wasn’t attempting to bump Davis. The incident wasn’t dissimilar to the sickening clash earlier in the season between Hawthorn’s Jordan Lewis and the Western Bulldogs’ Jarod Harbrow, which left the former concussed.
That incident rightfully went unpunished, with both players having their eyes on the footy.
The Match Review Panel, though, may deem Sandilands’ eyes weren’t solely on the footy, as he turned his body and made contact with Davis milliseconds after the young Crow took the mark.
But what was Sandilands supposed to do… cannon into Davis with no protection and risk personal injury?
Indeed, you hope the Match Review Panel can show some common sense and look beyond the specific wording behind the interpretation.
Of course, we want to protect the head, but footy is a contact sport and players will occasionally get hurt.
After all, there is a difference between a bump and a collision. One is intentional and one is accidental.
If Sandilands gets suspended for an accident like this, then the bumping interpretation needs to be revised… once again.
Nathan
Guest
I'm a Crows fan and even I'm glad Sandilands was cleared. It looked sickening at the game but it was a football collision, two guys going for the ball. Kudos to Davis for a great example of courage, not that it does him much good. @Redb - 'He (Sandilands) chose to bump instead of tackle ' - what?! Either you didn't see it or you don't know what you're talking about ... NO ONE chooses to tackle in a marking contest, it doesn't make sense. I think Buddy's a bit unlucky to have got games, but his incidents (chasing and bumping someone with the ball) are in no way comparable to a contest for a ball in the air. @allblackfan - Aussie Rules fans already know what a real bump is. The 'bump issue' is not with the ferocity or violence of the bump, it is with players getting hit in the head.
davelee
Guest
Fair enough Redb, guess maybe mud sticks with Buddy..... anyway when can we expect these Hawthorn fans on the streets?
Redb
Guest
Davelee, My point was Buddy Franklin has been crucified for similar incidents. Curiously apart from Franklin the MRP perhaps sensitive to fans perception that they are over policing the game have backed off a bit this year. I was pleased Enright got off as well. Our own David Hille perhaps fortunate, but poor ol Buddy can't take a trick.
Ben Somerford
Roar Guru
Good to see common sense prevailed and Sandilands got off. Here's the official assessment from the MRP; "Contact involving Fremantle’s Aaron Sandilands and the Adelaide Crows’ Phil Davis from the second quarter of Saturday’s match was assessed. The panel said Sandilands was running towards the ball in a legitimate attempt to mark the football. Contact was made while both players were seeking to take possession of the ball. No further action was required."
allblackfan
Guest
If you think you have a `bump' issue now, wait until Hunt and Folau join the fray. They'll show you what a real `bump' is!!! :-)
davelee
Guest
Exactly right DB, here's hoping he gets off.
DB
Guest
RedB he didn't choose to bump, he chose to mark and because he was second to the ball by a whisker a bump is what resuted. Unfortunaely the days of if you attack the ball then the umpires will look after you are well and truly gone. You now even see players pull out of what would otherwise be legitimate contests due to the over zelous rules and interperatations.
davelee
Guest
I guess that's the problem with the 'current rules' Redb. Watching the incident over and over again I really can't see what else Sandilands what supposed to do. It was a marking contest after all. I guess we'll eagerly anticipate the MRP's findings tonite!
Redb
Roar Guru
Sandilands is in strife on current rules. He chose to bump instead of tackle and made head high contact, same with Enright. If Sandilands gets off Hawthorn fans will march in the streets as Franklin has copped it several times due to height differences, not a valid defence at the MRP.