GEELONG coach Chris Scott has questioned whether the umpires and Match Review Panel are seeing eye-to-eye when it comes to dangerous tackles.
And the Cats' coach believes the one-match suspensions handed down to North Melbourne forward Jarrad Waite and St Kilda midfielder Koby Stevens "aren't right".
Both Waite and Stevens were charged by the MRP for their respective tackles that were graded as careless conduct with medium impact to the head.
Scott said the grey area on dangerous tackles should be addressed.
"Clearly, the umpires and the MRP are seeing things differently at the moment," Scott told Fox Footy on Monday night.
"That one [the Waite tackle] is a player on one leg completely off balance. It wouldn't take much effort at all to bring him down to the ground.
"We're asking too much of the players on this one, especially when the umpire is with a really good view looking at it and saying, 'That's play on', and then the outcome two days later is a two-week suspension, albeit down to one.
"I'm not sure that we're quite on the same page with this one and I'd hate to think that the fact that the players are concussed is playing into the outcome.
"I'm firstly acknowledging how difficult it is and that we do have a responsibility to look after the players but … in my humble opinion, those decisions aren't right."
Waite's tackle on Tom Lynch in the first quarter of Saturday's clash – which was called play on – left the Adelaide forward with concussion and unable to return.
Stevens' tackle on Nathan Wilson in the second quarter on Friday night saw the GWS defender leave the ground for a concussion test but return after half-time.
The officiating umpire did not deem Stevens' tackle dangerous, instead penalising Wilson for holding the ball.
St Kilda coach Alan Richardson said although he viewed it as a "great tackle" from the coach's box, the club was almost certain to accept the MRP outcome on Tuesday.
"That's where it becomes challenging because on the day you get the right call, or the call that works for you, and then later on it's called reckless," Richardson said about the continued confusion.
"It's very likely that we'll wear it.
"Our advice is that, at this stage, that we're probably not going to be able to reverse the decision. We just can't risk the two (weeks)."
