PerthNorg

I find this result a little unsatisfactory. As I have stated before, I do not condone the sledge. What is open to interpretation is not what was said exactly, but what was perceived. Selwood claims the derogatory comment (s***t) was made BEFORE he knew the tattoo was of Hedlands daughter. Des, of course, knew it was his daughter and automatically thought “he called my daughter a s***t!”. None of us were there, and no-one can confirm either players version of events. I feel extremely sorry for the members of the tribunal who had to sort that out.

What is not in dispute is the fact that Des Hedland reacting very violently. Not only that, but the reason Hedland was facing a six week suspension was because he has reacted like this before - in incidences that had nothing to do with his daughter. He was undisciplined, he reacted violently, and every footy mad kid who watched the Derby saw his reaction. For the AFL to not acknowledge the inappropriateness of the violence is disappointing to say the least, and it sets a very disturbing precedent.

I think it was a suprising result Lizzie, even if it was proved Selwodd said it, which it was not, many would still have considered it suprising, and many commentators think it sets an unworkable precedent.