Adelaide skipper Taylor Walker’s AFL season is likely over after he was handed a two-game suspension for his sling tackle on GWS star Josh Kelly.
Walker was charged with rough conduct after knocking out Kelly with a heavy tackle in the third quarter of Saturday’s clash in Canberra.
AFL match review officer Michael Christian classified the tackle as careless contact with high impact.
“In this particular case I believe there are elements of a sling (tackle) … it was a dangerous tackle and then it came to a question of impact,” he told reporters.
“Clearly Josh Kelly was in a bad way … it took a long time for him to get from the ground.”
Adelaide, out of contention for the finals, have the option of challenging the ban for a tackle initially rewarded with holding the ball – that decision was reversed and Walker was penalised for a dangerous tackle when Kelly’s injury became apparent.
“We thought he executed well but obviously they reversed that decision,” Crows assistant Matthew Clarke told reporters before Christian’s verdict was announced.
“I think he just tried to tackle him pretty hard.
“Some (tackles) … are really challenging, it’s a split-second game and you have got players of different body shapes and sizes coming into contact and it’s fierce contact.
“There are going to be accidents in the game of footy … (but) if players get hurt then the players themselves have accepted there’s a duty of care responsibility.”
Walker was the only player suspended, with Clayton Oliver, Dan Hannebery, Dale Morris, Trent Dumont and Aidyn Johnson offered fines.
North Melbourne forward Jarrad Waite escaped with a $3000 sanction for his high bump on Western Bulldogs backman Jackson Trengove.
An incident involving Collingwood tagger Levi Greenwood, who targeted Dayne Zorko while the Brisbane midfielder was down on his haunches, was deemed to be of negligible impact and no charge was laid against the Magpie.
St Kilda defender Nathan Brown was earlier referred to the tribunal for his crude bump on Essendon’s Adam Saad, which is set to attract a season-ending ban.
Essendon’s Cale Hooker accepted a $1500 sanction for misconduct against St Kilda’s Daniel McKenzie.
Sammy
Guest
Put it another way..if he didn't let him go which he clearly does as you can see his right arm pull away, kelly would now be in a coma
The Brazilian
Roar Rookie
Tex let him go? Ha! I've heard it all. Hurled him like a discus. Kelly was skimming the surface of the ground, like a rag doll during a kids dummy spit. Lucky to get only two weeks! Who started the 'Let him go' theory? Dermot Brereton. Even he couldn't remain straight faced. Says it all, really.
Don Freo
Guest
You're funny when you get angry. The replay might be a little blurred through your tears
sammy
Guest
And so should the penalties be even more inconsistent - one bloke actually pulls out of the tackle before ground contact ad should not have got a suspension at all, the other was Nyhuis. Kelly does not even try to brace himself and his arms were free to do so. Yopu then say favouritism, favouritism for what..being unfairly targeted by Christian repeatedly?. The club should have put Christian on notice the last time he went after our club with both Tex and Gibbs having charges dropped in an instant when they contested his ridiculous decisions. The AFL match review system is broke and Christian needs to go
TomC
Roar Guru
It sucks a bit that the umpire made the wrong call originally. It shouldn't have been holding the ball even if it had been a legitimate tackle, and even so the umpire should have immediately picked up that it was dangerous play. That allows Matthew Clarke to snidely complain about the decision being reversed, presumably echoing what is being said internally, when of course in truth the Crows have no reason at all to be upset about this incident. If anything it's the Giants who should be aggrieved. We really do have an issue with umpiring. It's getting harder and harder to umpire this game consistently and consequently harder to really trust the decisions that are made. We talk a lot about rule changes. We need to start talking about how we can make the game more intuitive to officiate.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Nyhuis was paid a free kick too. Both were footy acts. Both are unjust suspensions but the penalties are inconsistent. Walker's has had an enduring impact. Kelly will miss next week. Robbie Gray didn't miss at all. Walker has an established poor record. For Nyhuis it was a first transgression. It is only favouritism that gets him less weeks. You speak from a sad, disappointed place in your heart. We weep with you but, that's the way the bickie breaks.
sammy
Guest
No way..if he challenges he is likely to get a reduced suspension or maybe it gets dropped - the umpire closest to him pays him the free kick - ie the guy that was in the best position to apply the rules was going to reward him for the tackle. He let him go before he hit the ground...he did NOT drive him into the ground. As I said, Christian has had it in for Tex this year after that disgraceful decision to fine him for pushing shuey after shuey did the same thing to him 5 times right before and as happens hundreds of times per game. It took less than 1 minute for that to be thrown out and it made Christian look like the fool he is. Having said all that, I doubt the club will challenge though as tex has been playing injured and unfit most of the year so why worry about him playing out the last 2 games. It is a good chance now the club is out of a finals chance to blood some youngsters to see if they have what it takes
Don Freo
Guest
True.. he did let him go. He is not still holding on to him 2 days later. This "letting him go" thing is not a consideration. It was just some commentator mates trying to get him off. The sling, the head hitting the ground, the unconsciousness actually happened. Nothing to do with Kelly getting up. Tex could have escaped his light suspension one way, though. He'd be able to play this week if he didn't do it. If he challenges, they'll compare it with Nyhuis and he'll get another week. Nyhuis 'let him go' too...eventually.
Sammy
Guest
Are you serious..he actually let him go before he hit the ground. The form has been if a player pins the arms and drives the player into the ground and he was not pinning the arms..christian got his retribution on tex for tex contesting his poor decision to fine him a few weeks back. If kelly got up and walked away tex wins holding the ball..tex was very unlucky with the outcome as he let him go
User
Roar Rookie
Was worse than nyhuis, should of been four
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
As predicted. Let off easy for his name. How is that not as bad as the Nyhuis tackle? Discount for status. He took out the form midfielder of the comp. Nyhuis' victim played again the week following. The difference? There was a press outcry against Nyhuis. Silence for TEX who has a worse record than Nyhuis.
Aligee
Roar Rookie
Watching the replay, he probably could have done a stack more damage if he didnt let him go towards the end of the tackle, maybe he let him go deliberately, maybe not - i don't know. Sling tackles that don't hurt people should also result in a ban IMHO, they just need to be wiped out from all levels of the game.