JACK Viney's drawn-out attempts to avoid suspension show the AFL's judiciary system is working, says the League's football operations boss Mark Evans.
On Thursday night the Melbourne midfielder was freed to play against the Western Bulldogs on Saturday after the AFL's Appeals Board upheld the Demons' appeal of Viney's two-match suspension.
That was handed down by the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday, after the Match Review Panel sent Viney's clash with Adelaide's Tom Lynch directly to the Tribunal.
Describing the fierce debate about the bump as "convoluted", Evans said the "correct" decision had eventually been reached and defended the Tribunal members – Wayne Schimmelbusch, Wayne Henwood and Emmett Dunne – for initially suspending Viney.
"Their job is to be presented with some evidence and argument," Evans said on Friday.
"You have three people who have very good experience in the game as players but also as Tribunal members and they assess incidents.
"Sometimes they'll disagree with the Match Review Panel, and that's perfectly OK. On rare occasions, the Appeals Board will disagree with the Tribunal. That's perfectly OK. That's what the system's there for."
But he added that the Viney case would prompt the AFL to issue new guidelines for the Tribunal process.
He said an important issue was when the Match Review Panel assesses a player's intention in an incident.
"A part of that might be to reinforce to the Match Review Panel that when you're judging a players' intent, you're better off doing that at normal speed," Evans said.
"While you might have slo-mo vision and look at various parts of it, you should judge a player's intent at normal speed."
Evans also said the League would need to have another look at what constitutes a legal bump.
"We need to provide some guidelines or reinforce our guidelines around this decision to bump or just a collision, where there is an element that looks like a bumping action towards the end of it," he said.
"We need to work out what's the right fit for our game in there.
"Global sport is grapelling with this exact concept right now in relation to head injuries and concussions.
"We will be tested in the future to make sure our rules continue to protect player health and safety. Then there needs to be some commonsense approach of evaluating incidents according to those rules."
Despite the public groundswell of support for Viney, Evans said no club had sought clarification this week on the rules involving the bump and head clashes.
Evans said the discussion had meant the public and football world was in fact more aware of the rules around what is legal.
"I'm pleased that we've had that debate. I feel for Jack Viney and Melbourne Football Club that they have to lead us through that, because of the impact of them this week," he said.
"But we're actually better informed and what we're talking about here in our guidelines … is an election to bump. And that becomes very clear to me."
Despite outgoing chief executive Andrew Demetriou suggesting the rule may have "gone too far", Evans indicated it would not change.
"The instructions to players are no different than they were this time last week, and that is if you elect to bump, if you choose to bump, you must not cause forceful head-high contact."
