In my basketball days I used to think that if it went in, that was what was intended therefore it was skill, if it missed it was bad luck. There is a flaw in that sort of logic that I was simply too close to see.
The AFL tribunal gave Judd a four match ban for twisting an arm the other day. Clearly Judd was twisting the arm on purpose. Had he done serious harm it would have been seen as deliberate and significant punishment would have been appropriate. The logic should then run as follows,
- Judd was twisting the arm on purpose,
- No significant harm was done,
- Therefore no significant harm was intended.
Two weeks would have been severe, one week might just have been justifiable.
And that was the better of two dreadful decisions. You have got to feel sorry for Jack Ziebell. Here is a guy trying to earn a living. He was attacking the ball, even the tribunal realised that. Unless we want to end up watching a game for girls that should be excuse enough for any incidental contact. Ziebell was guilty of no offence at all. One week would have been unwarranted, four weeks is ludicrous.