Dan Houston

[Palpatine_Power]

Reasons:

Izak Rankine

23

Izak Rankine

Age

24

Ht

181cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.0

3star

K

9.0

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

2.0

5star

D

13.0

3star

K

9.0

4star

HB

4.0

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

2.0

5star

D

13.0

4star

K

9.0

4star

HB

4.0

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

5star

G

2.0

5star

was waiting under a high ball, he moving in the same direction as the ball, his eyes were on the ball, and he was exposed and vulnerable to any forceful contact from an opposing player.

An opposing player has a clear duty of care in these circumstances not to commit an act which can be reasonably foreseen to result in a reported offense.

Houston breaches that duty of care, and his breach was significant.

He had time to think, he had time to weigh up his options. He had time and the clear opportunity to tackle. He chose to run at speed for several meters and forcefully bumped Rankine.

We are satisfied he made forceful contact to Rankine's upper shoulder and neck. His forceful contact also resulted in Rankine's head making forceful contact with the ground.

Although Houston's feet did not leave the ground, and he appears to have made some attempt to lower his body, the time he had to decide not to bump, the vulnerability of Rankine and the speed and force of his impact, lead us to conclude that this was a serious breach of the duty of care.

Rankine could have expected to be tackled, he could not reasonably have expected to be bumped high.

The sanction is to be determined in the Tribunal's discretion. We’ve taken into account Houston's guilty plea, among other things, including his good record, his contrition and the need for consistency compared with other recent comparable Tribunal decisions.

Having done so, we consider the appropriate sanction is five weeks for the reasons set out above.

His carelessness was significant, the impact was severe. The immediate consequences for Rankine were evident, he was concussed, it appears his shoulder was hurt and there was the potential for more serious injury.

We do not consider the circumstances give rise to exceptional and compelling circumstances.

We do not consider the consequence of missing finals and potentially a grand final impacts the sanction that should be imposed, particularly for such a serious breach and such a significant injury.

 

[Palpatine_Power]

I love this part:

"We do not consider the consequence of missing finals and potentially a grand final impacts the sanction that should be imposed, particularly for such a serious breach and such a significant injury."

**** directly off. Like that's mattered in the past 10 years.

 

[Port 2004]

I love this part:

"We do not consider the consequence of missing finals and potentially a grand final impacts the sanction that should be imposed, particularly for such a serious breach and such a significant injury."

**** directly off. Like that's mattered in the past 10 years.

Barry Hall in 2005, Maynard 2023 hmm. Corrupt pieces of shit.

 

[chachi11]

It's shit like this which adds another layer of why I hardly watch this sport.

 

[PAFC66]

Worth every week. Whocares he's gone anyway. Start getting used to playing without him.

 

[Marmozet]

Barry Hall in 2005, Maynard 2023 hmm. Corrupt pieces of shit.

Cotchin 2017

 

[ClintEastwood]

What the hell did that guy's post just get removed for??

Pointing out a shitty thread on the Crows board.

 

[JUSTWORK]

Why would have we got Houston to say "I don't know why I didn't tackle".

How about;

"We were both trying to get to the drop of the ball, Isak got their first and I didn't have time to change my course of action and pull out of the contest" (which is a genuine football act) after which point Houston makes contact with Rankines body and not his head.

A genuine football act, which would only be avoided through not contesting the ball.

Instead we go in admitting guilt and asking "please don't suspend him for a grand final"

What a joke.

 

[Jojay]

5 weeks for an offence that doesn't even draw a free kick

 

[RossFC]

What the hell did that guy's post just get removed for??

Pointing out a shitty thread on the Crows board.

We don't need updates on what other boards are posting here.

 

[ClintEastwood]

It's shit like this which adds another layer of why I hardly watch this sport.

I hate what they're doing to the game, but I still love the everloving shit out of football. It's an addiction, I guess.

 

[Waspy79]

lol ****ing corrupt Mickey Mouse league.


I’m pretty close to being done with afl, why bother following something that is fixed.

It’s hard to see me maintaining interest in the league once my kids old enough to play sport and I’ll just dive into that on the weekends

About the only thing you’ve ever said that I agree with

 

[Waspy79]

Stupid or Weak.
Probably both.

I actually think it’s the right move but the club must maintain that position through each level of appeal. Consistency would be respected more than changing goal posts and shows a level of integrity that the league is incapable of.

 

[Flash of power]

I love this part:

"We do not consider the consequence of missing finals and potentially a grand final impacts the sanction that should be imposed, particularly for such a serious breach and such a significant injury."

**** directly off. Like that's mattered in the past 10 years.

missing a final, a potential prelim and a grand final is literally the equivalent of a 25 match ban. Go F yourselves AFL.. who was Maynard's lawyer? shoulda got him

 

[It Just Is]

Why would have we got Houston to say "I don't know why I didn't tackle".

How about;

"We were both trying to get to the drop of the ball, Isak got their first and I didn't have time to change my course of action and pull out of the contest" (which is a genuine football act) after which point Houston makes contact with Rankines body and not his head.

A genuine football act, which would only be avoided through not contesting the ball.

Instead we go in admitting guilt and asking "please don't suspend him for a grand final"

What a joke.

This. And then the second line of defensive being if the contact is deemed high due to events outside Dan’s control (whiplash/ground) then his carelessness is at the lowest possible end of the scale and no more than 3 weeks is appropriate.

Couldn’t have done any worse.

 

[Waspy79]

Barry Hall in 2005, Maynard 2023 hmm. Corrupt pieces of shit.

Cotchin 2017

 

[The Hobo]

I believe this is addressed in 4.2.c of the 2024 tribunal guidelines. 4.2 explains how the classification of reportable offences is determined, and 4.2.c relates specifically to determining if contact is high (or to the groin) vs. to the body.

https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2024/03/13/bfe20552-9e6a-4464-88b6-509b31d77ed8/2024-AFL-Tribunal-Guidelines.pdf

Here's the passage I think is relevant:



Here's 4.2.c in its entirety (I've bolded and italicised the previously quoted passage for emphasis):

Fair enough, that makes it pretty clear then

 

[Lighthouse End]

Get Carlton’s Lawyers on the phone now

Maybe not Carlton, but Carlton Crew? Mick Gatto is a pretty fair mediator. See if he'll take it on.

 

[TeeKray]

So the tribunal didn't accept that the bump was to the body and not high. I never really thought they would but that was our only hope of avoiding this outcome. Once it's concluded that the contact was high you just don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[philthy05]

Why would have we got Houston to say "I don't know why I didn't tackle".

How about;

"We were both trying to get to the drop of the ball, Isak got their first and I didn't have time to change my course of action and pull out of the contest" (which is a genuine football act) after which point Houston makes contact with Rankines body and not his head.

A genuine football act, which would only be avoided through not contesting the ball.

Instead we go in admitting guilt and asking "please don't suspend him for a grand final"

What a joke.

Also worth noting that the incident was unusual in that it wasn’t a ground ball sitting there predictably, or a ball travelling from a kick,

A bloke double fisted it and it travelled back over rankines head at a fast speed. Unless they’re psychic Neither Houston or rankine would have known they were going to be anywhere near the ball 1 second earlier when the ball was travelling in the opposite direction.

 

[JimmyBC]

Ah well pretty much as expected there's no point appealing I'd rather go in with Dennis Denuto than our lot.

 

[Pat07350]

About the only thing you’ve ever said that I agree with

This. And then the second line of defensive being if the contact is deemed high due to events outside Dan’s control (whiplash/ground) then his carelessness is at the lowest possible end of the scale and no more than 3 weeks is appropriate.

Couldn’t have done any worse.

Yep. Have to appeal. It can’t be judged as high contact. Get a silk in or else we are not serious. Tell them it’s 2 weeks max or we go to court. Just like the Maynard case. Grow some balls. It was a great bump.

 

[Waspy79]

Cotchin 2017

Cripps 2022

 

[JUSTWORK]

I actually think it’s the right move but the club must maintain that position through each level of appeal. Consistency would be respected more than changing goal posts and shows a level of integrity that the league is incapable of.

Yea, absolutely we can't change positions now. We'd look foolish.
We've put our selves in a position where the best Houston can get is 3, absolute best.

Maynard would have missed the GF and Cripps missed a Brownlow if they had out footy department.

 

[Skindy]

So the tribunal didn't accept that the bump was to the body and not high. I never really thought they would but that was our only hope of avoiding this outcome. Once it's concluded that the contact was high you just don't have a leg to stand on.

Wish they would release the evidence with which they made that determination. From the sounds of it the medical report didn't identify any injury or trauma to the neck.