Dees star's ban upheld as AFL tribunal rejects biomechanist evidence bid
Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- AFL player Jacob van Rooyen's appeal against a three-match suspension was rejected.
- The tribunal denied Melbourne's request to present biomechanical evidence.
- Van Rooyen will miss Melbourne's final home-and-away game and potentially the rest of the season if they don't win two finals matches.
The AFL tribunal has upheld a three-match striking suspension for Melbourne forward Jacob van Rooyen, rejecting the club's appeal. This decision deals a significant blow to Melbourne's finals aspirations, potentially sidelining a key player for the remainder of the season.
The swing of van Rooyen's left arm constituted the act of a strike. It was a forceful blow. It was not simply a trailing or leading arm that Aliir collided with.
Melbourne's attempt to overturn or reduce the ban for van Rooyen's strike on Port Adelaide defender Aliir Aliir was unsuccessful. The tribunal also denied the club's request to introduce evidence from a biomechanist, which they had hoped would support their argument that van Rooyen was attempting to mark the ball and not acting carelessly.
Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson KC stated that van Rooyen's action constituted a strike, describing it as a "forceful blow." While acknowledging van Rooyen's intention to contest the mark, the tribunal found that shortly before impact, he ceased to intend to mark the ball and failed to exercise reasonable care. The impact was graded as severe, with potential for further injury.
Van Rooyen was initially intending to mark the ball, but we find that shortly before impact, he ceased to intend to mark the ball. We say this despite van Rooyen's evidence to the contrary.
The suspension means van Rooyen will miss Melbourne's final home-and-away game against the Western Bulldogs. For him to play again this season, Melbourne must win two finals matches. Van Rooyen has been a standout performer, kicking 42 goals in 22 games this season.
Even if it was van Rooyen's sole objective at all times to contest the mark, we find that he did so in a way that failed to take reasonable care to avoid acts which could be reasonably foreseen to result in a reportable offence.
Originally published by ABC Australia. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.