Demons to challenge May's controversial three-match ban

The Advertiser

24-07-2025

Melbourne will challenge Steven May's controversial three-match ban for a collision that has divided the football world.
May was found guilty of rough conduct at the AFL Tribunal on Wednesday night for the collision that concussed Francis Evans and left the Carlton forward with a broken nose and a chipped tooth.
A biomechanics expert calculated May had only 0.56 seconds from the ball's final bounce until the moment of the collision, and that the premiership defender would have needed at least 0.2 to 0.25 seconds to react.
"The time available to him to perceive and react to a complex scenario is not sufficient for him to adapt and avoid contact," AIS biomechanist Daniel Cottam said in his findings, not all of which could be submitted as evidence for the tribunal hearing.
May argued he had little time to react, saying he was so sure he was going to get to the ball first that he was left shocked when Evans beat him to it during Saturday's game at the MCG.
The Demons announced on Thursday they are challenging the suspension, with the case to be heard by the AFL Appeals Board 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's football manager Alan Richardson said in a statement.
"After reviewing the outcome and seeking further expert legal advice this morning, we have decided to appeal the Tribunal's decision."
In his findings on Wednesday night, AFL Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson said May had ample time while running towards the ball to realise there was a big chance he wouldn't arrive there first and to come up with a contingency plan.
"The most he could have hoped was that he would arrive at about the same time as Evans," Gleeson said.
"It was far more likely that he would reach the ball after Evans.
"As he gathered the ball, Evans had time to position his body just slightly so as to turn slightly away from May.
"This gives some indication that May had sufficient time to make some attempt to move his body in a way that minimised or avoided the impact limits.
"May made no attempt to change his path, his body position or his velocity at any time leading up to or in the contest."
Before the hearing, Carlton captain Patrick Cripps questioned how May could have approached things differently.
"I felt like both of them were trying to contest the ball," Cripps told the On the Inside podcast.
"You never want to see a player get injured, but I don't understand what we want players to do.
"If that's a grand final and (May) hesitates and Franky gets the ball, what do you do?"
If May is unsuccessful in his appeal, he will miss games against St Kilda, West Coast and the Western Bulldogs.
He was set to miss this week's clash with St Kilda in any case due to concussion.
Melbourne will challenge Steven May's controversial three-match ban for a collision that has divided the football world.
May was found guilty of rough conduct at the AFL Tribunal on Wednesday night for the collision that concussed Francis Evans and left the Carlton forward with a broken nose and a chipped tooth.
A biomechanics expert calculated May had only 0.56 seconds from the ball's final bounce until the moment of the collision, and that the premiership defender would have needed at least 0.2 to 0.25 seconds to react.
"The time available to him to perceive and react to a complex scenario is not sufficient for him to adapt and avoid contact," AIS biomechanist Daniel Cottam said in his findings, not all of which could be submitted as evidence for the tribunal hearing.
May argued he had little time to react, saying he was so sure he was going to get to the ball first that he was left shocked when Evans beat him to it during Saturday's game at the MCG.
The Demons announced on Thursday they are challenging the suspension, with the case to be heard by the AFL Appeals Board 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's football manager Alan Richardson said in a statement.
"After reviewing the outcome and seeking further expert legal advice this morning, we have decided to appeal the Tribunal's decision."
In his findings on Wednesday night, AFL Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson said May had ample time while running towards the ball to realise there was a big chance he wouldn't arrive there first and to come up with a contingency plan.
"The most he could have hoped was that he would arrive at about the same time as Evans," Gleeson said.
"It was far more likely that he would reach the ball after Evans.
"As he gathered the ball, Evans had time to position his body just slightly so as to turn slightly away from May.
"This gives some indication that May had sufficient time to make some attempt to move his body in a way that minimised or avoided the impact limits.
"May made no attempt to change his path, his body position or his velocity at any time leading up to or in the contest."
Before the hearing, Carlton captain Patrick Cripps questioned how May could have approached things differently.
"I felt like both of them were trying to contest the ball," Cripps told the On the Inside podcast.
"You never want to see a player get injured, but I don't understand what we want players to do.
"If that's a grand final and (May) hesitates and Franky gets the ball, what do you do?"
If May is unsuccessful in his appeal, he will miss games against St Kilda, West Coast and the Western Bulldogs.
He was set to miss this week's clash with St Kilda in any case due to concussion.
Melbourne will challenge Steven May's controversial three-match ban for a collision that has divided the football world.
May was found guilty of rough conduct at the AFL Tribunal on Wednesday night for the collision that concussed Francis Evans and left the Carlton forward with a broken nose and a chipped tooth.
A biomechanics expert calculated May had only 0.56 seconds from the ball's final bounce until the moment of the collision, and that the premiership defender would have needed at least 0.2 to 0.25 seconds to react.
"The time available to him to perceive and react to a complex scenario is not sufficient for him to adapt and avoid contact," AIS biomechanist Daniel Cottam said in his findings, not all of which could be submitted as evidence for the tribunal hearing.
May argued he had little time to react, saying he was so sure he was going to get to the ball first that he was left shocked when Evans beat him to it during Saturday's game at the MCG.
The Demons announced on Thursday they are challenging the suspension, with the case to be heard by the AFL Appeals Board 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's football manager Alan Richardson said in a statement.
"After reviewing the outcome and seeking further expert legal advice this morning, we have decided to appeal the Tribunal's decision."
In his findings on Wednesday night, AFL Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson said May had ample time while running towards the ball to realise there was a big chance he wouldn't arrive there first and to come up with a contingency plan.
"The most he could have hoped was that he would arrive at about the same time as Evans," Gleeson said.
"It was far more likely that he would reach the ball after Evans.
"As he gathered the ball, Evans had time to position his body just slightly so as to turn slightly away from May.
"This gives some indication that May had sufficient time to make some attempt to move his body in a way that minimised or avoided the impact limits.
"May made no attempt to change his path, his body position or his velocity at any time leading up to or in the contest."
Before the hearing, Carlton captain Patrick Cripps questioned how May could have approached things differently.
"I felt like both of them were trying to contest the ball," Cripps told the On the Inside podcast.
"You never want to see a player get injured, but I don't understand what we want players to do.
"If that's a grand final and (May) hesitates and Franky gets the ball, what do you do?"
If May is unsuccessful in his appeal, he will miss games against St Kilda, West Coast and the Western Bulldogs.
He was set to miss this week's clash with St Kilda in any case due to concussion.