Carlton’s finals hopes have received a huge boost after captain Patrick Cripps had his two-match suspension overturned at a marathon AFL Tribunal Appeals Board session.
After Cripps was unsuccessful in overturning a rough conduct charge at the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday night his hearing at the Appeals Board on Thursday night loomed as his final hope of having the two-match suspension squashed.
The 27-year-old’s airborne collision, which left Brisbane’s Callum Ah Chee with concussion, was graded as careless, high impact and high contact.
Christopher Townshend QC, acting for Cripps, argued that there was a “denial of natural justice” because AFL Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson failed to give directions to the jury on Tuesday night before they retired to consider their verdict.
Townshend said Gleeson himself had created confusion during the hearing by effectively stating Cripps’ action was a bump.
“In the absence of even Mr Cripps being asked if he wanted to bump his opponent … the chairperson later postures, ‘Can you bump and contest at the same time?’” Townshend said.
“[The jury was told to consider a] thesis that the chairperson has suggested rather than what the evidence has shown.
“A fair examination of the whole of the evidence could not support clear satisfaction that the player was doing something other than an incident where both players had eyes for the ball and both players contested the ball, as found by the Tribunal.
“We say for the foregoing reasons the Tribunal’s decision is infected by error and so unreasonable that it requires reversing.”
AFL counsel Nicholas Pane said a player could contest with his eyes on the ball but still be in the action of bumping.
Chair Murray Kellam and jurors Richard Loveridge and Stephen Jurica deliberated for one hour and 45 minutes before deciding in favour of Cripps.
All up, the session took more than four and a half hours.
“The Tribunal (on Tuesday night) found that both players had eyes for the ball and that both players had contested the ball,” Kellam said.
“The Tribunal nevertheless found that the acts by Mr Cripps fell within the phrase in the bumping of an opponent.
“We are unable to conclude that the evidence before the Tribunal was sufficient to form this view.
“His (Cripps’) evidence was that at all times he had his eye on the ball and that his intention was to take possession of the ball in an aerial contest, and that he did not see Mr Ah Chee also launch for the ball.
“In cross examination it was never put to Mr Cripps that he bumped.”
Kellam also said the lack of directions given to the Tribunal jury before they retired to make their decision also denied Cripps “procedural fairness”.
The successful appeal means Cripps is free to play in crunch games against Melbourne and Collingwood in the final two rounds.
Currently seventh on the ladder with a 12-8 record, the Blues will need to win one of the two matches to guarantee the club’s first finals spot since 2013.
If Carlton lose both matches, they will need to rely on other results in order to stay inside the top eight.
Charlie Keegan
Roar Guru
Which is why they need to enshrine another law to discourage appeals. You appeal a suspension and it fails and the suspension gets doubled.
ScottD
Roar Guru
When Cripps left the ground he was clearly planning on taking possession. I think the vision shows that isn't true at all
ScottD
Roar Guru
Cripps chose to leave the ground yet isn't responsible for the consequence of that action? I am completely lost as to what the rules are now.....
1dawg
Roar Rookie
I’ll appeal that appeal. Sounds appealing.
1dawg
Roar Rookie
I think Cripps or a Carlton supporter ran over Pete’s dog at some stage. I’m sure it was an accident.
AdamDilligafThompson
Roar Rookie
Lmfao I completely understand. :laughing: :laughing:
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
Still a shark in a cheap suit Adam with blood on his hands...get thee out spot!
AdamDilligafThompson
Roar Rookie
Have they got the time too if they wanted too considering its Friday already, when do the blues play?
AdamDilligafThompson
Roar Rookie
I've been trying to sign Robbie Gray up to the #metoo movement for years but hasn't come to fruition as yet. Not from a lack of trying though.lol.
AdamDilligafThompson
Roar Rookie
I've just put a reply in the new thread well ok this one with some added to it but thats it Carlton just had a better lawyer by the looks of things not that its right but thats just how the system works, walk into a court room with a legal aid lawyer, dont expect to walk back out anytime soon, walk in with a barrister and you can more than likely make plans for after court and know you'll be available.lol.
Aransan
Roar Rookie
When a big player like Cripps takes the action he did against a smaller player in Ah Chee, concussion to the smaller player is a quite likely outcome.
Aransan
Roar Rookie
My guess is that if you remove the appeal of an appeal then the judiciary would become involved. They should have rejected the appeal of the appeal and forced Carlton to take that route. Just imagine, Cripps is allowed to play the last two games while this is being decided, then if the AFL win in the courts he has to serve his two weeks suspension in the finals. That would be justice!
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
Yeah Adam, seems someone forgot to read Cripps his rights so now suddenly he was trying to jump to collect the ball? Spare me.
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
So many people quoting other incidents that were perhaps wrong to justify this one that is clearly wrong Don. Absurd defensive tactics of Carlton supporters who know they are wrong, are jumping in the air high-fiving each other and dreaming of a premiership because the money grabbing car smash chasing lawyer got him off on a technicality? Spare me.
ChrisH
Roar Rookie
Collisions like this happen all the time in football. If Ah Chee wasn't concussed, the MRO would have justified why Cripps' actions were valid. There can be just centimetres difference between a concussion or not. When there's a concussion, the MRO and tribunal work overtime to make the action look illegal. And unfairly on the accused player, tell him what he was thinking like they can read his mind. The AFL has to sort this out. You can't have players getting told one week their action is legal, and the next it's not, when the only difference is concussion.
Liam Salter
Roar Guru
Be happy, but be recognisant that you've literally won on a technicality, and that him being out there in the next fortnight is a tainted victory.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
The AFL have copped it here. Are they to blame? I think they'd be horrified Cripps got a licence to hit heads with impunity. They just need to remove this appeal of an appeal from the process.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Maybe Freo can engage that lawyer mid-game next time Tabs has his arms chopped in a marking duel. Can lawyers perform in pastel lycra? I suppose they'd demand pastel silks.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Falcon?
Macca
Roar Rookie
How did Kennedy get his jaw broken Peter?