A very telling article has come out from Hamish Brayshaw, and it should and must be both applauded and actioned. It is brutal. It is to the point, and it is absolutely spot on.
The whole issue regarding high-head contact is being fiercely debated in the media, and some say that each high-head contact should be rated according to the action. Some in the media have stated that Toby Greene’s suspension should not have happened. Jesse Hogan’s suspension was overturned because he threw a fist against another player’s head, and it was deemed to be negligible.
We have seen the AFL come out quite categorically stating that high-head contact in any form must be seen in the long term and what damage it can and does do to a person, and therefore, the offending player must be suspended. But then again, a character reference can get certain players off but not all. The sheer hypocrisy surrounding this is mind-blowingly unfathomable.
I agree with Hamish Brayshaw, who states that the game right now on this issue stands on a precipice of confusion, and the direction the AFL now takes must be one of consistency, no matter who it is. If the AFL does not adhere to its rulings, such as high-head contact and a player has a suspension but gets overturned because of intent, or even if the player is not concussed, or even due to good character, then more and more people will back away from not only playing the game but supporting it. The damage in the long-term from high-head contact in sports is profound and startling. How many more players will in the long-term suffer the effects of concussion, and the offender gets a slap on the wrist?
To subscribe to what the game was and how this issue was handled back in the 1980s, even the 1990s, is ignorant and misguided. Back then, there was no fundamental understanding of the long-term effects of continual high-head contact on a person and what it does to their brain. Should we just accept that players will get concussions or be hit in the head and allow these players to then suffer the consequences of brain damage in their later years? Absolutely not, and neither should anyone.
In Hamish Brayshaw’s open letter, he brilliantly stated the double standard that the AFL is facing in this issue. Past players are suffering. Greg Williams has said that he cannot remember much of his life: his wedding, the birth of his kids, or even winning the 1995 Grand Final. Danny Frawley committed suicide, and it was found that he, too, suffered the effects of concussion and CTE when an autopsy was performed. Shane Tuck also took his life and it was also found that he too suffered from the effects of continual concussions.
How many other players must be feeling the effects of brain damage that will not show up until they are dead? For those in the media who say that some high-head contacts are negligible, they should and must, in all honesty, shut up. They are not the ones suffering; maybe they will only really understand when they eventually suffer the effects or know someone close to them suffering.
The AFL MUST stop this nonsense of unsureness about what constitutes a high-head contact. If any person hits the head, no matter how or why, that offending player must be suspended, irrespective of their character. If a concussed player is out, the offending player must be out for that same period. If a player is not concussed but plays on, the offending player must be suspended for at least one week, no matter their character or not.
If the AFL is serious about this, they must read and take action on all the points that Hamish Brayshaw has raised.
#GO BLUES!