The Demons will appeal the Steven May ban that has left players confused

West Australian

2 days ago

AFL players have already begun to 'hesitate slightly', knowing the 'margins' between a fair contest and a lengthy ban are slim as the impact of a three-match suspension handed to Melbourne defender Steven May reverberates through the game.
The Demons on Thursday confirmed they would appeal the ban, adamant May's 'sole intention was to win the ball'.
FOX FOOTY, available on Kayo Sports, is the only place to watch every match of every round in the 2025 Toyota AFL Premiership Season LIVE in 4K, with no ad-breaks during play. New to Kayo?
Join now and get your first month for just $1
.
Western Bulldogs coach Luke Beveridge weighed in, saying he didn't agree with the suspension, but was adamant talk of it changing the fabric of the game was misplaced.
May was suspended despite the AFL tribunal conceding his collision with Carlton's Francis Evans last Saturday night was not a bump.
In the final minutes of his defence
, May's legal counsel Adrian Anderson declared 'there was not much more he could do', but after more than 90 minutes of deliberation, the three-man tribunal panel determined he should have slowed down or changed his path to avoid Evans.
Debate has raged since the incident, with some pundits adamant the game could no longer allow players to charge headlong towards opponents, whether the ball was in play or not.
That's the grounds on which Melbourne will appeal with a hearing next week.
'We felt we presented a really strong case and Steven's sole intention was to win the ball, and we believe he provided a contest in a reasonable way given the circumstances.' Melbourne football boss, Alan Richardson said.
'After reviewing the outcome and seeking further expert legal advice this morning, we have decided to appeal the Tribunal's decision.'
Evans, who lost a tooth and was left bloodied and bruised, conceded to the tribunal that he didn't think he was going to get to the ball before May, adding to the confusion over the ban.
Essendon vice-captain Andy McGrath conceded the incident was a 'tricky' one for the tribunal but said over the course of his career his on-field attitude had changed, and he now asked himself questions despite the 'split second' nature of making calls.
'They are split-second decisions, there are so many in game, and the longer I play – this is my ninth season – those split-second contests have changed a lot,' he said.
'If you are second to the ball, you have a big responsibility to not make contact with your opponent's head.
'It definitely comes through your mind, whether that causes us to hesitate slightly, I am questioning that more and more in the game to protect the opposition player's head.'
Beveridge said talk of the May ban setting any sort of 'precedent' was unfounded and it purely determined that the outcome of this collision was a suspension.
The Demons star failed to beat a three-match ban at the Tribunal for this shot on Carlton's Francis Evans.
'One of the things that has never happened in our tribunal system is there's never really been any precedent established, so I don't think anyone should be talking about precedents and how it affects the game into the future,' he said.
'Each one on their own terms is assessed.
'Do I agree with it? Probably not. When there is eyes for the ball and for all intents and purposes the players are trying to win the ball … that's where the debate rages.'
Carlton captain and Brownlow medallist Patrick Cripps said he wasn't sure what May could have done and McGrath agreed.
'It didn't look great but it's really hard to pull out of that contest at the last second,' he told SEN.
'As players, it's pretty tricky to know what penalty lies based on the act and we know that's margins between a fair play and a pretty significant sanction.'
Prior to their announcement, Demons great Garry Lyon believed the club would appeal.
Lyon did not agree with the AFL tribunal's argument that May 'had sufficient time with an unimpeded view of what was before him to determine what he could and should do in the likely event that he did not reach the ball either first or at the same time'.
'That's nonsense, which is why I've lost a bit of faith in this and why I think they'll appeal,' Lyon told SEN Breakfast.
'No-one could reasonably think that they weren't going to get to that football. (Evans) thought Steven May was going to get there first.'