Sam Durham was lucky to only get two weeks for his bump. But he was not half as lucky as Adam Cerra, the bloke he bumped.
Durham could have had, and deserved, a much longer suspension. Cerra could have had, and didn’t deserve, a spinal injury.
Former Bomber Adam Saad remonstrates with Sam Durham after his bump on Adam Cerra.Credit: AFL Photos
This was the type of bump we have not seen in a long time in the AFL because by now players have broadly understood the concept of duty of care.
The AFL match review panel – we won’t call it an officer because, as much as Michael Christian is the face and name attached to decisions, it is unfair for all the responsibility for each decision to fall at his feet given those decisions are also agreed to by others at the AFL – was partly tied in the length of suspension by the schedule that calculates penalties.
The fact the contact to Cerra’s head was mercifully glancing and the bulk of the impact was to his shoulder mitigated the injury to Cerra and thus also diminished the suspension. It needn’t have.
The AFL tribunal guidelines state “the absence of injury does not preclude the classification of severe”.
The rules anticipated precisely this sort of moment where the action must be heavily punished irrespective of the severity of the injury it caused.
For instance, imagine Barry Hall only shaved Brent Staker’s nose when he turned and swung his fist at him in 2008. Do we comfortably say “oh well, Baz, you got lucky, here’s two weeks”? No.
Consider the penalty to Durham let alone the injury to Cerra were he to have made actually contact to the head.
Cerra had his hands on the ball when Durham chose not to hold up, or attempt to tackle him, but instead took his extra steps and braced to cannon through him.
A two-match ban was insufficient, but you can understand how, on a reading of the schedule, the match reviewers came graded it careless, high contact, high impact and came up with that penalty given Cerra did not suffer a concussion. But the guidelines allowed for it to be graded severe impact, which would have led to either a three-game ban or the matter being referred straight to the tribunal.
The deeming provision for high bumps was also altered this year to specifically include the top of an opponent’s shoulders as well as their head or neck.
Durham is a very good player whose physical style of play has elevated him from an after-thought draft pick to become a regular starting midfielder. But having a certain style doesn’t absolve any player from responsibility for their actions.
Leigh Matthews – no one’s definition of a flighty outside player – said Durham was lucky with the suspension he got. Michael Voss, Cerra’s coach – and like Matthews, not exactly a delicate player – was right after the game when he said, “you just can’t do that any more”. They get it.
And no, Matthews was not simply sticking up for the captain he coached to three premierships at the Brisbane Lions. Don’t forget it was another of his Lions premiership players, Brad Scott, coaching Durham and the Bombers.
Scott said players have to make split-second decisions on the football field. That is true, and overwhelmingly players have learnt to quickly make the right decision not to bump someone head-on. Durham took steps and went low to brace to bump Cerra, not tackle him as he could do to a player with his hands on the ball, after making that split-second decision. He had time to make a few more split-second decisions but committed to his bump.
What was the right suspension for Durham? At least twice what he got; four weeks minimum.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
