Facing suspension (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16656800%5E2722,00.html) for one match just before your team has a chance to win its first Grand Final in over 70 years has got to be a nightmare for any player. So what would you do to escape a suspension for that match? Sydney has called in a top QC (who just got a bouncer acquitted of the manslaughter of cricketer David Hookes in a high-profile case) to keep their captain in the squad for its best chance at a premiership since 1933.

To be honest, this all seems a little, well, strange to me. Australian Rules Football has become increasingly sanitised over the last ten to fifteen years; I remember that after the Geelong/Hawthorn Grand Final, when multiple Howthorn players spent the evening in hospital with injuries sustained on the field. If the same thing happened today, Geelong players would be facing long suspensions and possible criminal charges.

This might be more of an AoDA topic, but is law and legal process becoming too dominant in and around sports? Is it an Australian thing, or is happening everywhere else, too? Certainly, rules and order are necessary - and you should be punished for punching another player in the face deliberately - but even a few years ago, the idea of lawyers in a sporting tribunal would have been nigh-unthinkable.

Any thoughts or comments, folks?

That's professional sport for you. It never used to happen much before because sport was more amateur. Now that every sport seems to be professional these days, it becomes a business and is run like a business.

Further information re: the original post -

Panel rules on Hall's low blow (http://www.theage.com.au/realfooty/news/afl/panel-rules-on-halls-low-blow/2005/09/19/1126982002537.html)

Barry on regardless (http://www.theage.com.au/realfooty/news/afl/barry-on-regardless-hall-set-to-battle-ban/2005/09/19/1126982002531.html)

Spearhead's citing ridiculous, says Lockett (http://www.theage.com.au/realfooty/news/afl/spearheads-citing-ridiculous-says-lockett/2005/09/19/1126982002534.html)

Herald-Sun article (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,16660095%255E20322,00.html)

True, Harbs, sport is a business now, and is being run like one. As an aside, thanks very much, Mr John Elliot, for starting football down that path. Surely, though, the focus should always be on what happens on the field, rather than what legal loopholes you can exploit.

Even in some of the bigger-money, higher-profile competitions, I can remember relatively recent conduct which should have attracted more serious attention than this. There was rugby player John Hopoate's unsettling strategy for one, and less recently, an NBA umpire was spat on by a player who received the equivalent of a rap on the knuckles.

Hall is cleared! Despite being entirely neutral in the outcome of the big game, I must say that I would be disappointed to see a non full stength side be crushed in the final. A guy in my class at school who supports the Eagles was also happy with the decision because he felt that his team wouldn't get the full regognition if they didn't beat a full strength swans side.

Also I think that it would be criminal if such a great player missed his teams first grand final since 1933.

Whenever I play a sport I always enjoy a 'clean' game, so I suppose that if that requires suspensions/tribunals etc then let it be. I like to watch a free flowing game of aussie rules, and I hate to see an Crows player be hit and I am not particually proud when a Crows player hits another player.


BTW what did people think of Barrys hit - to me it didn't look that hard, but given the response by the other players response and the fact that good 'ol Barry was an ameture boxer before he played footy it could have been quite a hard knock.