AFL Tribunal: Dylan Shiel cops one-match ban after controversial push

Essendon veteran Dylan Shiel has been hit with a one-match suspension after failing to beat a rough conduct charge at the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday afternoon.

Shiel faced the tribunal after shoving Geelong’s Mark O’Connor, who then collided with his Essendon teammate Luamon Lual during the second quarter at Kardinia Park last Friday. Laul flipped into the air but managed to get his hands down just in time to stop himself from landing on his head.

AFL match review officer assessed the incident as rough conduct and the AFL sought a one-match suspension penalty, arguing Lual could have suffered a serious head or neck injury arising from Shiel’s unreasonable conduct.

Shiel provided evidence during the tribunal and said he was “quite shocked” to see his teammate on the ground after the whistle.“I don’t know how he got there,” he told the tribunal.

The Essendon midfielder said players don’t like to “play Russian Roulette” and “hope the ball comes your way”, arguing he tried to protect the space during the marking contest. He also denied seeing other players in his periphery vision.

“I’ve got eyes on the ball the whole time. I thought I was in a one-on-one marking contest.”

AFL counsel Nick Pane argued Shiel “forcefully and blatantly” pushed O’Connor towards the fall of the ball - an action which was inherently dangerous and brought a high potential for injury to others.

Essendon’s counsel Ben Ihle countered and said Shiel’s actions were not unreasonable, arguing the midfielder was trying to defend the drop zone against a larger opponent, describing it as a “quintessential football act”.

He argued there was no high contact to O’Connor and Shiel’s eyes “were always for the ball”. He also argued the tribunal’s focus should be on O’Connor, not Luamon Lual.

“It is clear in our submission that the evinced intention is the protection of opposition players, and therefore the invitation that the AFL has extended to the tribunal to look beyond O’Connor and look at the incidental consequences by Shiel’s conduct to another player is misconceived,” he said.

“This a situation that the rules do not cover,” he continued.

The tribunal deliberated for nearly two hours and handed down the one-match suspension, classifying the incident as “a clear case of rough conduct”

“As the ball got close Shiel forcefully pushed O’Connor into the marking contest, causing him to collide heavily with player Lual,” the tribunal chairperson said.

“The forceful push on O’Connor was unreasonable in the circumstances. It was not conduct that a reasonable player would consider prudent. Shiel breached his duty of care by pushing O’Connor in the way he did and in the circumstances.”

The tribunal said they did not accept that Shiel “had eyes on the ball at all relevant times” and said they did not accept that Shiel didn’t see other players in position to contest the mark.

The tribunal also concluded there was “significant potential of injury” to O’Connor.

“The potential for a concussion or facial injury was real. O’Connor was forcefully pushed into a dynamic situation where he could have sustained a number of serious head and facial injuries. We consider a one-match suspension to be appropriate in the circumstances.”

Shiel will miss Friday’s game against St Kilda at Marvel Stadium.

Evening everyone,

That ends tonight’s coverage of the AFL Tribunal. Thanks for sticking around (especially for that two-hour wait) and see you next time!

Rory Laird’s case is up now. Reminder, Laird caught Jamie Cripps high with a late bump as he rushed to put pressure on the Eagles forward last Sunday.

The Crows have argued this is not rough conduct; however, the AFL said Laird bumped Cripps and had his eyes on the opponent, not the ball.

The tribunal deliberated for less than 30 minutes and upheld the one-match ban.

“We have carefully examined all of the evidence and we find Laird did bump his opponent, and in doing so, he made high contact,” tribunal chairperson said.

“Laird sensibly conceded that if the tribunal was satisfied that the conduct involved a high bump that the charge is to be upheld. Accordingly we uphold the charge.”

The 31-year-old will miss this week’s clash against Collingwood.

Essendon veteran Dylan Shiel has been hit with a one-match suspension after failing to beat a rough conduct charge at the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday afternoon.

Shiel faced the tribunal after shoving Geelong’s Mark O’Connor, who then collided with his Essendon teammate Luamon Lual during the second quarter at Kardinia Park last Friday. Laul flipped into the air but managed to get his hands down just in time to stop himself from landing on his head.

AFL match review officer assessed the incident as rough conduct and the AFL sought a one-match suspension penalty, arguing Lual could have suffered a serious head or neck injury arising from Shiel’s unreasonable conduct.

Shiel provided evidence during the tribunal and said he was “quite shocked” to see his teammate on the ground after the whistle.“I don’t know how he got there,” he told the tribunal.

The Essendon midfielder said players don’t like to “play Russian Roulette” and “hope the ball comes your way”, arguing he tried to protect the space during the marking contest. He also denied seeing other players in his periphery vision.

“I’ve got eyes on the ball the whole time. I thought I was in a one-on-one marking contest.”

AFL counsel Nick Pane argued Shiel “forcefully and blatantly” pushed O’Connor towards the fall of the ball - an action which was inherently dangerous and brought a high potential for injury to others.

Essendon’s counsel Ben Ihle countered and said Shiel’s actions were not unreasonable, arguing the midfielder was trying to defend the drop zone against a larger opponent, describing it as a “quintessential football act”.

He argued there was no high contact to O’Connor and Shiel’s eyes “were always for the ball”. He also argued the tribunal’s focus should be on O’Connor, not Luamon Lual.

“It is clear in our submission that the evinced intention is the protection of opposition players, and therefore the invitation that the AFL has extended to the tribunal to look beyond O’Connor and look at the incidental consequences by Shiel’s conduct to another player is misconceived,” he said.

“This a situation that the rules do not cover,” he continued.

The tribunal deliberated for nearly two hours and handed down the one-match suspension, classifying the incident as “a clear case of rough conduct”

“As the ball got close Shiel forcefully pushed O’Connor into the marking contest, causing him to collide heavily with player Lual,” the tribunal chairperson said.

“The forceful push on O’Connor was unreasonable in the circumstances. It was not conduct that a reasonable player would consider prudent. Shiel breached his duty of care by pushing O’Connor in the way he did and in the circumstances.”

The tribunal said they did not accept that Shiel “had eyes on the ball at all relevant times” and said they did not accept that Shiel didn’t see other players in position to contest the mark.

The tribunal also concluded there was “significant potential of injury” to O’Connor.

“The potential for a concussion or facial injury was real. O’Connor was forcefully pushed into a dynamic situation where he could have sustained a number of serious head and facial injuries. We consider a one-match suspension to be appropriate in the circumstances.”

Shiel will miss Friday’s game against St Kilda at Marvel Stadium.

Hey folks, the tribunal is… still deliberating. It’s coming up to almost two hours.

If you’re a tad bored, feel free to check out our recent article exploring the father-son rule here. 

It’s been over an hour and the tribunal is still deliberating. Sorry folks, stay with us.

The tribunal has started deliberating.

Stay tuned folks.

Essendon’s counsel Ben Ihle said the penalty for Shiel’s actions should be, at worst, a fine. They then proceed to drill down into the semantics and meanings of rough conduct.

He present a very legal-heavy argument. In short, he argued at the focus should be on O’Connor, not Luamon Lual.

“It is clear in our submission that the evinced intention is the protection of opposition players, and therefore the invitation that the AFL has extended to the tribunal to look beyond O’Connor and look at the incidental consequences by Shiel’s conduct to another player is misconceived,” he said.

“This a situation that the rules do not cover,” he continued.

“What does that mean in the consequences of this case? It means that when one comes to consider rough conduct, Shiel’s conduct as against O’Connor. And when one comes to consider – if the tribunal is of the view that that is unreasonable in the circumstances – what flows from it as a result of an appropriate classification according to a focus on O’Connor, not Lual.”

Phew.