Soccer has a red card system. Rugby has the sin bin. Basketball has technical fouls. Ice Hockey has the match penalty.
When is the time for the AFL to introduce a send-off rule?
That time would be now.
With all the attention around concussion and the potential, lasting effects it has, one aspect has been acutely overlooked.
Let's take a look.
Those who cop a knock to the head are forced to come from the ground, be assessed by club doctors and league officials and undergo concussion testing.
Introduced back in 2013, clubs have up to 20 minutes to assess the player.
But what happens on the other side of the fence? What happens to the player who performed the bump? Or who caused the contact that resulted in a mandatory concussion test?
During that 20 minutes, the 'offender' is allowed to continue playing, almost adding salt to injury.
And perhaps during that fateful time, the 'offender' kicks the winning goal or makes a game-saving play.
Fair?
Admittedly, there is a grey area when it comes to contact sports, given some incidents are unavoidable and therefore make it hard to adjudicate what is worth an immediate, in-game sanction and what's not.
But, examples like St Kilda's Jimmy Webster, who elected to leave the ground, brace for contact and collect North Melbourne captain Jy Simpkin, the case is pretty clear-cut.
Sure, if found by the MRO and Tribunal to have conducted himself in a way that doesn't fit the rules and guidelines of Australian Rules Football, he could see weeks on the sidelines.
Webster is currently serving time for his lewd hit on Simpkin, to the tune of seven weeks, rivalling some of the bigger suspensions in recent times.
However, the Kangaroos skipper was ruled out of the remainder of the match, while Webster was able to continue playing.
The Kangaroos were hindered by the absence of their skipper, while the Saints, in comparison, got off scot-free.
Fair?
AFL CEO Andrew Dillon believes there is no need to introduce a "red card" system yet, despite many other codes effectively implementing it into their game.
โWe've got a pretty robust match review and tribunal system,โ Dillon said on Channel 7'sย Sunrise.
โ(Webster's) received a seven-match suspension. We see that as a sufficient deterrent. So the red card's not on our agenda at the moment.
โIn a game the clubs have got substitutes and you can work that out, and you've also got interchange cap rotations."
Under the current system, the 'offender', in a way, is almost 'rewarded' by their actions, given it could rub out a player and no instant punishment dealt out.
This in turn could lead to an earlier activation of the medical substitute or result in the opposition being down a player for the remainder of the match.
Thus, creating a ripple effect in favour of the 'offender's' side.
The current system provides no in-game ramifications for the 'offender', which is something that should be explored.
The current system would rather be reactive - in terms of suspension - instead of proactive, an in-game penalty.
The AFL should use a red card or send-off rule as another deterrent for head-high bumps, given that some players still haven't received the message.
