The Victorian Supreme Court must now be wondering about the wisdom of interfering last week in the suspension of an AFL player. The court granted an injunction to put on hold a nine-week suspension imposed on Carlton’s Greg Williams. Williams was allowed to run on to the field in the next round of play. And, lo, he was charged again on video evidence from a field umpire for allegedly kneeing an opposing player.
We are seeing the gradual lawyerisation of sport in Australia. It has gone hand-in-hand with the growing commercialisation of sport. Both trends have been unwelcome, but particularly the lawyerisation.
Racing off to court to appeal against tribunal decisions undermines the authority of the tribunal. It can only instill an attitude that with enough money and lawyers players can sneer at the tribunal. Once one player is seen to get a suspension stayed, others will follow, particularly around finals time. And the hopeless inefficiency of the courts is such that a case would only come on after the finals were over.
With the commercialisation players have gained huge salaries and therefore have a lot to lose if suspended. So it is important for the tribunal to get it right. If not, it almost invites aggrieved parties to find whatever avenue they can to vent their protest. Williams’s suspension of nine weeks was a long one, and would therefore be very costly. But his offence was also a severe one: aggressive contact with an umpires. The public interest in protecting umpires from violence is probably much higher than the public interest in protecting large incomes of footballers against misapplication of the rules of natural justice by the tribunal.
The solution is for an appeal body in the AFL for suspensions over, say, four weeks and a general agreement by all to be bound by tribunal decisions and not go to court.