In the end Geelong didn’t want to risk taking Tom Hawkins’ case to the AFL tribunal, but the Cats would have had plenty of support if they had.
Geelong reluctantly accepted a one-game suspension for Hawkins on Tuesday after he was charged with striking Greater Western Sydney co-captain Phil Davis during the Cats’ hard-fought win at Simonds Stadium last weekend.
The contact looked negligible but the AFL match review panel deemed it intentional conduct with low impact to the head, which attracted a two-game ban – down to one with an early guilty plea.
Geelong looked headed to the tribunal on Monday when coach Chris Scott said that he was shocked by the assessment, but with pivotal games against North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs in the next fortnight, the Cats chose the safe option.
“The way the system works we risked that double penalty, obviously, and it’s just not worth the risk in our view,” Scott said.
“It’s just too hard to prove your innocence.
“The football industry, as far as I can see, seems pretty united in their view on this and we share that view.
“But we’re just not prepared to risk double the penalty when we’ve got such an important few weeks coming up.”
Davis spoke to the media on Tuesday and expressed his surprise at the match review panel’s finding.
His view was a popular one amongst his AFL colleagues.
“I’m surprised he’s got weeks for that,” said Western Bulldogs skipper Bob Murphy on Fox Footy.
“The sniff test, for me, that doesn’t seem to quite add up.”
North Melbourne forward Drew Petrie felt the incident looked worse in slow motion.
“I saw it in real time (earlier) and it certainly looks less of a suspendable offence than when you slow it down,” he told Fox Footy.
“(But) I can certainly understand why they didn’t challenge it … Geelong play the Bulldogs after they play us and there’s too much to lose by going to the appeal.”
Richmond forward Jack Riewoldt felt the action deserved nothing more than a fine.
“It’s hard to comment too much on it but I think they brought in the fining process for incidents like this,” he said.
“We want to stamp those punches and gut punches out of the game, they’re not acceptable on the football field or anywhere, but we have the fining process in place for instances like that I would have thought.”
Bernie
Guest
Where's the confusion? He punched someone high in the neck/jaw and deserves a game away to think about how it effects the look of the game. I'm a junior football coach and we have a difficult time retaining good athletes whose Mums would prefer them to play soccer. Footy is a tough game and not for everyone, but punches off the ball are not acceptable. Junior players see this action highlighted by the media and defended by senior coaches and think it's fine to replicate in their matches and as highlighted there are plenty of optional sports out there
andyl12
Guest
Of course he's a protected species. Why he doesn't get booed on the level of Adam Goodes is anyone's guess- if there was any way I could influence the crowd on this I would. Hawkins' past indiscretions have also been ignored by the MRP, which is why I find it hard to sympathise on this occasion regardless of the surrounding facts.
WW
Guest
Speaking of inconsistency, can someone tell me why Joel Selwood's front on bump did not even get considered by the MRP? Protected species?
I hate pies
Guest
Two weeks for a love tap is ridiculous. The gradings are clearly wrong.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
If there's one thing I'm confident the AFL doesn't need, it's red cards.
D Fitz
Roar Rookie
Big Al, I agree. The pre bounce biffo is not football and should be stopped. It must in some cases be contrary to existing rules. If so, it should be penalised by the umpires and then it would soon stop.
BigAl
Guest
Absolutely right that coaches comments can't help in any of this! I'm sure that coaches are responsible for all that ridiculous bumping and pushing etc... that goes on before the first bounce. It just looks like ridiculous, childish phoney bravado! The debut of that tall American Collingwood recruit was farcical and embarressing when just before the bounce 5 or 6 'tough' guys obviously under direction descended on him to give him a good - pinching, punching and poking... - ridiculous !!!
Kurt
Guest
Perhaps I'm oversimplifying things, but what's confusing about "don't punch people"? Unlike many other rules in the AFL - e.g. - holding the ball - there really isn't much ambiguity involved. It reminds me of the excellent sketch by Amy Schumer "Football Town Nights'. Basically the new High School football coach introduces a new code of conduct which includes the controversial rule 'No Raping'. This confuses the players, who then spend the rest of the sketch asking 'but what if it's Halloween and she's dressed as a sexy cat', 'but what if she thinks it's rape and I don't' etc. The coach just repeats the rule over and again much to the players' bemusement. I think even the average footy player can absorb and understand the rule ' no punching'.
John Uhr-Henry
Guest
Having read a lot of the comments offered by some of your readers, not many if any, offer any real solutions to this blight in our game. As I previously suggested the only way to stop it is to have severe penalties which will nip these unsightly occurrences in the bud and within a week or two they will be no more. Fines to players won`t stop it either as it reoccurs from various players every week. It is little use to suggest some are very small to others being very intentional and being vicious is no solution to this growing problem. I was watching my grandson playing firstly in his school completion on Saturday morning then his under 14 club game on the following day (Sunday) at noon. It has prevailed in all his many games I have watched this season, and in some games it has resulted in all in brawls which come into effect through the younger brigade copying what seems to be normal in the higher and older players grades to the big boys in the major leagues. Lets do something to really stop these vicious acts occurring. I certainly don`t think any comments offered from the various coaches are any criteria`s to resolving these problems.
John Uhr-Henry
Guest
Having read a lot of the comments offered by some of your readers, not many if any, offer any real solutions to this blight in our game. As I previously suggested the only way to stop it is to have severe penalties which will nip these unsightly occurrences in the bud and within a week or two they will be no more. Fines to players won`t stop it either as it reoccurs from various players every week. It is little use to suggest some are very small to others being very intentional and being vicious is no solution to this growing problem. I was watching my grandson playing firstly in his school completion on Saturday morning then his under 14 club game on the following day (Sunday) at noon. It has prevailed in all his many games I have watched this season, and in some games it has resulted in all in brawls which come into effect through the younger brigade copying what seems to be normal in the higher and older players grades to the big boys in the major leagues. Lets do something to really stop these vicious acts occurring. I certainly don`t think any comments offered from the Scott brothers are any criteria`s to resolving these problems.
Slane
Guest
It isn't a double penalty. It's just that with an early guilty plea his charge is downgraded to only be 1 week. Without to early guilty plea he would be missing two matches.
Penster
Guest
And dacking them. Those Nanna pants they wear underneath.
D Fitz
Roar Rookie
Thank you Dougie for responding to my post.
Pumping Dougie
Guest
D.Fitz, the video clearly shows his punch glanced Davis's chin front-on. Both players are lucky Davis doesn't have a glass jaw.
Pumping Dougie
Guest
I agree TomC. The Scott brothers aren't a very credible source of what is and isn't acceptable on the football field. It's pretty stupid and unnecessary to punch anybody anywhere on the football field, unless it's in self-defense or retaliation for something similar. In AFL tv-covered matches, it's 100% stupid regardless of the circumstances. I like Hawkins but I have no sympathy for him.
D Fitz
Roar Rookie
The Match Review Panel " deemed it intentional conduct with low impact to the head". Geelong should have appealed because the blow was to the neck and not the head. Hence as specified the charge was incorrect and unsustainable.
Stephen
Guest
Intentional contact- Yep, that's a tick Low impact- Can't argue with that. So it meets the criteria for prescribed penalty- simple! I don't know....were there some carry over points involved for previous conduct?
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Ha good one Don, insert smiley face.
Lamby
Roar Rookie
"The contact didn’t look negligible to me." This. It was a punch to the throat. You could see his whole throat vibrate in slow motion. This punch was very close to the carotid artery. A punch to the carotid artery can cause permanent damage. It can trigger a stroke, heart attack or cardiac arrest!! This was a dangerous punch and deserves to get MORE than 2 weeks.
Don Freo
Guest
Just pay a holding free.