North Melbourne's bid to get forward Paul Curtis off his three-match suspension for a dangerous tackle has failed at the tribunal.
Curtis was booked for rough conduct after his tackle last Saturday left West Coast player Hamish Davis with concussion. The incident was deemed careless conduct, severe impact and high contact, with Davis's arms pinned.
However, it was thought North Melbourne might be able to argue the case at the tribunal, with Davis contributing to the fall when he lost his footing. After weighing up the arguments from both parties, the tribunal deliberated for more than an hour before reaching its final verdict, which was again bad news for Curtis and the Roos.
Tribunal's findings
“The tribunal is comfortably satisfied that Paul Curtis’s tackle on Hamish Davis was a dangerous tackle,” the official statement said. “Curtis came in from the side, wrapped his arms around Davis’ arms, and dropped and rotated Davis into the ground. Curtis made no apparent attempt to keep his feet, release either of Davis’ arms or to rotate Davis onto himself.”
As for North Melbourne's argument that it was “the momentum of the tackle” that forced Davis to go to ground, the tribunal disagreed. “The vision shows that Davis had both feet on the ground when he handballed. It was the technique of Curtis that resulted in him being brought to ground,” the statement said.
“The technique of Curtis was to drop his own legs away to the side and bring Davis to ground. There may have been some contact between the players’ legs that contributed to some extent to them going to the ground, but it was the manner in which Curtis tackled Davis that was the overwhelming reason for them coming to ground in the way in which they did.
“A reasonable player in the circumstances would have kept their feet in the tackle, or at least attempted to do so, or would have released either or both of Davis' arms, particularly once the handball had been affected. He would have rotated or attempted to rotate Davis onto himself to some extent. Curtis did none of this. He simply pinned Davis and dropped him to the ground.”
Rejection of arguments
It was submitted on behalf of Curtis that Davis had his hands and forearms free and that this was known to Curtis, rendering the tackle other than dangerous. However, the tribunal noted, “Curtis gave no evidence, and so we do not know what he actually knew. The question, therefore, becomes what a reasonable player would have known. As the outcome demonstrates, because Davis had both arms pinned and because he was dropped into the ground at speed and with some force, a reasonable player in Curtis’ position would not have believed that Davis had any meaningful opportunity to brace for impact.”
The tribunal also dismissed comparisons to other tackles, including Billy Frampton's tackle on Brody Mihocek last week, where Mihocek suffered a fractured neck but Frampton was cleared. “The vision shows that Davis’ head hits the ground with considerable force. The vision also shows that Davis was unable to take his feet for an extended period of time, and when he did, was unable to walk from the ground without assistance. The medical report confirms that he has suffered a concussion. The Tribunal guidelines provide that particular consideration should be given to any injury suffered by the player. The injury suffered by Davis here was clear and was significant. None of the other examples we were shown involved a player suffering a concussion. The fact that a concussion results from a reportable offence does not mean that the impact will inevitably be graded as severe. When we take into account the nature and severity of the injury and the evident and significant force with which Davis’ head impacted with the ground, we find that the impact here was severe.”
Curtis unsuccessfully went to the tribunal last year to contest a three-match suspension for a tackle on Port Adelaide's Josh Sinn.
