"THE AFL has unveiled a radical overhaul of its tribunal system that also loosens the rules for Brownlow Medal eligibility.
Under a new format the demerit points system and carry-over points have been abandoned, replaced by a more flexible system.
All low-level penalties that once drew one-match bans will now see players handed fines, with only a third low-level offence in a season triggering a suspension.
Under new Brownlow rules, a player must be suspended to be ineligible, so can win the award despite accepting fines for tummy taps, low-level strikes and low-level rough conduct.
Incidents last year assessed as level-one penalties worth 125 points (therefore one week) will now only draw a fine of $1500, or $1000 with a guilty plea.
Of 61 players ruled ineligible for the Brownlow last season, 34 were as a result of 125-point offences which will now be penalised with a fine.
It was forecast in the Brownlow Medal review mid-year, with the AFL Commission approving AFL football boss Mark Evans’ proposal over the weekend.
Evans said the old rules around the Brownlow Medal hit too many players who were forced to take reprimands.
“It takes away those players who plead guilty to a reprimand and were able to play but had lost Brownlow eligibility, so we think this is an improvement for today’s football particularly given the forensic analysis of football and the role of the match review panel,’’ he said.
The league has also loosened its controversial accidental head clash rule after incidents this year involving Fremantle’s Nathan Fyfe and North Melbourne’s Brent Harvey.
The match review panel can now consider a range of six factors and use more common sense.
Fyfe would likely still be penalised but Harvey would get off on insufficient force.
The factors the panel can consider include whether the player bumped was in play or protected himself, whether the bumping player left the ground, whether there was an alternative to the bump, and the force used.
Evans said Fyfe would still likely have been suspended but believes there is now room for discretion.
“We still need to be very protective of the head in bumping contests but we do accept there can be a reason to process a head clash differently to a shoulder to head clash,” he said.
“In that particular case the MRP would have to determine did he have other options and they would say he had other options.”
Under the review the three levels of grading — reckless, negligent, intentional — have been reduced to two — careless or intentional.
Players will now receive a week’s discount for a guilty plea but the discount for a good record is abolished.
Players who have served two weeks of suspension in the past 24 months have a bad record loading applied, which sees an extra match levied.
There is still a table of offences for the match review panel to formulate bans, but much more discretion is allowed.
The match review panel hands any offence worth more than three weeks to the tribunal and can escalate the impact of an incident which could cause injury, effectively bumping up the penalty.
THE AFL’S TRIBUNAL OVERHAUL
KEY POINTS
- No more complicated demerit points, just penalties of weeks’ suspension or fines
-Just two gradings systems - careless or intentional - rather than the three confusing gradings
-The MRP uses a simplified tick-the-box system but can sent reports to the tribunal if ban doesn’t fit the crime.
-All low-level incidents which once drew 125 points (reprimand with guilty plea) now replaced by $1500 fine.
-Any MRP charge with a suspension over three weeks goes direct to the tribunal
-Players must be suspended to be ineligible for the Brownlow, so can be fined for tummy taps and border-line hits and still win it.
-Players still get a week discount for a guilty plea and still get an extra week for a bad record
-Accidental head clashes are now not automatically reportable, with discretion for the MRP to let players off
ACCIDENTAL HEAD-TO-HEAD CONTACT
-In 2014 a player who bumped was responsible for any contact he made, even in an accidental head clash.
-In 2015 the MRP and tribunal has discretion to allow a player to escape penalty and has six factors to consider.
They are:
-The degree of force
-If the bumped player was actively involved in play?
-How far the player who bumped ran to make contact?
-Could the bumped player protect himself?
-Did the bumping player leave the ground?
-Was there an alternative for the player who bumps?"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...edal-eligibility/story-fni5f22o-1227134815744
All fantastic moves in my opinion.
