Hawthorn’s dynamic forward, Mabior Chol, is facing a potential financial penalty after a forceful tackle on Sydney Swans’ Nick Blakey during Thursday night’s clash. The incident occurred as the Swans were attempting to launch an attack from their defensive half. Chol, with his characteristic athleticism, executed a strong tackle from behind on Blakey, successfully winning a holding-the-ball free kick.
However, the nature of the tackle has drawn scrutiny, and it’s highly probable that Chol will be reported by the AFL’s match review panel. Based on the league’s matrix for similar incidents, a grading of careless conduct with medium impact and bodily contact typically results in a financial sanction rather than a suspension.
While Blakey’s head did make contact with the ground during the tackle, it appears he may have initiated this contact in an attempt to draw a free kick for himself. This distinction is crucial in the AFL’s assessment of tackling incidents.
A Familiar Scenario for Chol
This isn’t the first time Chol’s tackling technique has come under the microscope. Keen-eyed fans and commentators have been quick to draw parallels between this recent incident and a controversial tackle from last year’s preliminary final. In that match, Chol’s tackle on Geelong’s Tom Stewart resulted in Stewart suffering a concussion.
At the time, Chol was initially handed a three-match suspension. However, following a lengthy and intense 100-minute tribunal hearing, Hawthorn’s legal team successfully argued that the tackle was a “football action” and “not unreasonable.” This defence ultimately led to the overturning of the suspension, allowing Stewart to potentially participate in the Grand Final.
The similarities between the two tackles have reignited discussions about the interpretation of such actions within the game. While the outcome of the Stewart incident was favourable for Chol, the current situation with Blakey suggests that the match review panel will be closely examining the details of the tackle to determine the appropriate sanction.
Understanding the AFL’s Tackle Matrix
The AFL’s approach to grading tackles is designed to ensure player safety while also acknowledging the inherent physicality of the sport. The matrix considers several key factors:
- Carelessness vs. Intent: Was the contact accidental, or was there a deliberate attempt to cause harm?
- Impact: How severe was the force of the contact? This is often assessed by the potential for injury.
- Bodily Contact: Did the tackle involve contact with the head, neck, or spine?
- Consequences: Did the tackle result in an injury, such as a concussion?
In Chol’s case against Blakey, the “careless conduct” and “medium impact” classifications are likely due to the force of the tackle and the potential for injury. The fact that Blakey’s head made contact with the ground, even if self-initiated, contributes to the assessment of impact. The “bodily contact” element will be scrutinised to determine if it meets the threshold for a suspension.
The Financial Fallout
If Chol is indeed fined, it would serve as a financial deterrent, aiming to discourage similar actions in the future without removing him from the field of play. This approach allows players to continue participating while acknowledging the need for accountability for forceful or potentially dangerous tackles.
The AFL is constantly refining its rules and interpretations to balance the excitement of the game with the paramount importance of player welfare. Incidents like this provide valuable case studies for the match review panel and contribute to the ongoing evolution of the sport’s disciplinary framework. Fans will be watching closely to see how the AFL addresses this latest tackle from Mabior Chol.
