Richmond’s Bachar Houli is set to learn his fate as the AFL appeals against his “manifestly inadequate” suspension for knocking out Carlton’s Jed Lamb.
The unprecedented challenge, to be heard by the Appeals Board on Thursday at 1730 AEST, follows an uproar over the two-game suspension handed to Houli by the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday night.
The tribunal jury – comprising David Neitz, Hamish McIntosh and Wayne Henwood – dismissed Houli’s argument the incident was careless instead of intentional conduct.
But they sparked outcry when they handed down a two-game sanction, having cited Houli’s exemplary character after being presented with references from Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and celebrity academic Waleed Aly.
AFL football operations manager Simon Lethlean informed Richmond on Wednesday that the AFL would appeal the sanction.
Lethlean, who fronted the media to read a prepared statement but did not take questions, said the appeal had been lodged on the grounds that “the sanction imposed was manifestly inadequate”.
“I want to stress that the AFL takes impact to the head extremely seriously,” Lethlean said.
“This appeal is based on the AFL’s view in relation to the sanction imposed and not a judgement on the character evidence or the character of Bachar Houli in general.”
Richmond on Wednesday afternoon acknowledged the appeal, adding that they would consider their options.
Match review panel member Nathan Burke criticised the weight the tribunal placed on the character references.
“If somebody goes in next week and does exactly the same thing but doesn’t know Waleed Aly, doesn’t know the prime minister, does that mean they get three or four weeks?,” Burke said on Fox Sports News.
The case was referred directly to the tribunal under the MRP guidelines but the sanction was the same as if it had been assessed as careless conduct with high impact to the head – three games down to two with an early plea.