There were mixed results from Tuesday's AFL Tribunal processes, where West Coast's Harley Reid and Western Bulldogs forward Rhylee West each challenged respective suspensions handed down by the Match Review Officer.

West saw his suspension cleared by the Tribunal in what was a successful challenge by the Bulldogs.

Reid's case followed, with the Eagles failing to have the teenager's two-game ban reduced to one week.

You can read through the processes of each case below.

Eagles unsuccessful with Reid challenge

Verdict: Harley Reid has seen his two-game suspension upheld at the AFL Tribunal. He will next be available to play come Round 16 against Hawthorn.

The Tribunal agreed with the AFL's findings that the level of impact was 'high' rather than 'medium' given the actions of the tackle, the vulnerability Wilson was placed in and the potential to cause injury.

7:45: The jury is now deliberating. A verdict will come soon.

7:38: Grace: It is not appropriate to make an example of this 11-game player.

7:34: Grace: The tackle intent on the part of Reid can be inferred to tackle him legally and roll him. It is not disputed it was a dangerous tackle, but the impact was not high. It is clearly not high.

Grace: The following observations can be made...

  • There was no pinning of the arms
  • It was no more excessive than the Charlie Cameron incident
  • Simialr to the Barrass-Walters incident, Wilson was able to play out the match
  • Unlike both Cameron and Barrass examples, Reid rotates Wilson through the tackle such that the impact occurs first with the right arm/shoulder
  • The impact on the ground was momentary. It was almost instantoues that Wilson rolled over and put his head up to look where the ball was. He then got up and took his kick with no problem whatsoever

7:23: The Eagles are using past examples of both 'high' impact and 'medium' impact offences to compare these with Reid's incident and classified grading of 'high'.

The first is one involving Hawthorn's Will Day on Geelong's Brad Close in Round 4 last year. This was classified as 'high' impact.

The second example is Jaeger O'Meara's tackle on Charlie Spargo from Round 11 last year. This was classified as 'medium' impact.

"This is an example where the player's arm is pinned and they are driven into the turf," Grace said.

The Eagles are now using an incident from Round 5 this year, with Charlie Cameron's tackle on Jake Lever classified as 'medium' impact.

The last example is Tom Barrass' tackle on Michael Walters from Round 6 of this season. This was graded as 'medium' contact.

7:18: West Coast Counsel David Grace: The right arm/elbow (of Wilson) makes first contact with the ground, breaking the fall to an extent.

7:08: AFL Counsel Sally Flynn: "It is clear there was no injury to player Wilson, but that is not the end of the inquiry."

The AFL has submitted the following argument to build their case:

  • The nature of the tackle/the execution sees Reid rotate Wilson, "lifting and then slinging Wilson to the ground. There is no attempt to lower the momentum of Wilson going to the ground".
  • The extent of force used, which is "excessive".
  • The vulnerable position Wilson found himself in. "Player Wilson was in a vulnerable position, given the manner he was slung backwards he was unable to use his arms to break his fall."

7:02: Reid will not give evidence.

7:00: Reid has pled guilty to rough conduct, with the Eagles arguing the grading of impact is 'medium' and not 'high'. A reduced grading would mean Reid is suspended for one game instead of two.

St Kilda's medical report confirms Wilson did not require a concussion test following the incident. It also lists the contact level with the ground as 'mild'. Wilson did not have concussion symptoms at the time, during the match, post-match or the following day.

West's ban for 'bump' on Pie cleared

Verdict: Rhylee West has seen his one-game suspension for rough conduct cleared. He will be available to face Brisbane in Round 13.

The Tribunal found that broadcast vision did not catch obvious vision of West attempting to tackle Maynard and not bump Howe, but further angles did, which aided the Bulldog's case. The Tribunal was satisfied in saying West did not bump and did act reasonably.

The charge was dismissed.

5:46: The jury is now deliberating.

5:26: Anderson is breaking down footage of the incident, showing West's left arm wraps around Maynard while his eyes are set on the Magpies defender and not Howe.

"The tackle was applied well before the brace for impact," Anderson said.

5:17: West's Counsel Adrian Anderson argues the step taken by West off his left foot is to advance his tackling motion on Maynard, not to get into a position to bump.

The Dogs are arguing that Howe's movement in coming between West and Maynard led to circumstances outside of West's control.

5:00: AFL Counsel Sally Flynn: "The resultant conduct (from West's attempted tackle on Howe) was careless.

"This was a clear bump and must be deemed careless.

"Player West was not contending for the ball, he elected to attempt a tackle on Maynard and then bumps Howe in the process.

"This is a dangerous action that ha the potential to cause a concussion or a broken jaw as West leads in and makes forceful contact with Howe's head."

4:41: West will give evidence...

West: "I could see Maynard was running towards the footy, I come from the other side and my intention is to tackle Maynard. An objective of my position is to apply pressure. I lay a tackle on Maynard and then the ball fizzles out, and then play resets and I play out the game.

"I assumed Maynard was going to pick the ball up cleanly and I was going to apply a tackle.

"I'm then in a brace position, you can see there's another player (Howe) behind Maynard as my arm is wrapped around Maynard.

"You can always anticipate [the ball] will roll clean, so it deviates and goes underneath that group of players.

"My intent was to tackle Maynard. My focus was on Maynard and the ball, and Howe came into my peripheral late."

West Denied bumping Howe, that his eyes were set on Howe and that he did initiate the contact with Howe.

"My eyes are on Maynard and then they follow the football. The contact was incidental," he said.

"The ball was clearly going to be won by Maynard, if I played for the ball it could have led to serious injury."

4:38: Rhylee West has pled not guilty to the charge, believing it was not rough conduct and that his conduct was not unreasonable in the circumstances, and that he did not elect to bump but instead made a brace for contact.

The Dogs then argue the incident occurred from circumstances outside of West's control.

If the charge is still upheld, the Dogs will argue the level of impact should be 'low' not 'medium', which would see West's ban reduced to a fine.