/ Jul 23, 2025
Trending
That is what is expected. It’s not easy. Often it’s not even fair. But that is what is expected to maintain the game’s essence while protecting combatants’ heads.
That part of football is about as secret as a Coldplay cuddle. Players should know.
Steven May collects Francis Evans.
Not even the AFL’s legal counsel Andrew Woods thought any of May’s decisions were easy. Nor did he accuse him of deliberately attempting to hurt his opponent, Carlton’s Francis Evans. He didn’t even consider what May did to be a bump. What Woods was describing was, according to Gleeson, a case of May “running through” Evans.
Woods contended May got those key decisions wrong when Carlton’s Ashton Moir overcooked a handball to Evans and put him on a collision course with May; both of them vying for a tumbling oval ball, an object as unpredictable as the US president.
Woods said “a prudent player” needed to consider when computing his actions that led to the collision such factors as the unpredictability of the bounce and the pace with which he attacked the ball as well as the line he ran.
No one, however, is lauded as the most prudent player of his time when entering the Australian Football Hall of Fame.
Tough, uncompromising perhaps. Prudent? Not so much.
The game has changed. But this decision was never going to change it.
Players have known what they need to do when faced with a similar situation to May, a tough, uncompromising player if there has ever been one, for a long time now.
The tribunal decided he made a series of decisions that led to the outcome when he could have made one that led to a different outcome.
Loading
He could have been less certain he was going to reach the unpredictable ball first. He could have altered his approach as a result. He could have positioned his body differently, something Evans managed to do, in the final instant.
May knew what was at stake as he made each decision in a series of decisions, albeit each determined in a split second, with a goal at risk. Putting a player at risk was prioritised above the risk of conceding a goal.
As Gleeson said in his judgment, May had “a relatively long time to sum up the key features of the contest” and determined that “a reasonable player in today’s game would not have collided with Evans in the manner that happened here”.
“For Evans’ sake”, some might say on hearing May was banned, and they will be right.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
That is what is expected. It’s not easy. Often it’s not even fair. But that is what is expected to maintain the game’s essence while protecting combatants’ heads.
That part of football is about as secret as a Coldplay cuddle. Players should know.
Steven May collects Francis Evans.
Not even the AFL’s legal counsel Andrew Woods thought any of May’s decisions were easy. Nor did he accuse him of deliberately attempting to hurt his opponent, Carlton’s Francis Evans. He didn’t even consider what May did to be a bump. What Woods was describing was, according to Gleeson, a case of May “running through” Evans.
Woods contended May got those key decisions wrong when Carlton’s Ashton Moir overcooked a handball to Evans and put him on a collision course with May; both of them vying for a tumbling oval ball, an object as unpredictable as the US president.
Woods said “a prudent player” needed to consider when computing his actions that led to the collision such factors as the unpredictability of the bounce and the pace with which he attacked the ball as well as the line he ran.
No one, however, is lauded as the most prudent player of his time when entering the Australian Football Hall of Fame.
Tough, uncompromising perhaps. Prudent? Not so much.
The game has changed. But this decision was never going to change it.
Players have known what they need to do when faced with a similar situation to May, a tough, uncompromising player if there has ever been one, for a long time now.
The tribunal decided he made a series of decisions that led to the outcome when he could have made one that led to a different outcome.
Loading
He could have been less certain he was going to reach the unpredictable ball first. He could have altered his approach as a result. He could have positioned his body differently, something Evans managed to do, in the final instant.
May knew what was at stake as he made each decision in a series of decisions, albeit each determined in a split second, with a goal at risk. Putting a player at risk was prioritised above the risk of conceding a goal.
As Gleeson said in his judgment, May had “a relatively long time to sum up the key features of the contest” and determined that “a reasonable player in today’s game would not have collided with Evans in the manner that happened here”.
“For Evans’ sake”, some might say on hearing May was banned, and they will be right.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
It is a long established fact that a reader will be distracted by the readable content of a page when looking at its layout. The point of using Lorem Ipsum is that it has a more-or-less normal distribution
The Us Media 2025