Lloyd's confusion over Tribunal act

Matthew Lloyd, a former Australian Rules Football (AFL) player and current commentator for Channel 7's coverage of the AFL, has expressed his view that the AFL should eliminate the use of character references in mitigating suspensions for players. This issue has been a topic of debate in the AFL community due to concerns that character references may not accurately reflect a player's behavior or intentions and could potentially result in inconsistent penalties.

The AFL's tribunal system is responsible for handing out suspensions and fines for rule breaches during matches. The tribunal considers various factors when determining penalties, including the specific rule broken, the player's previous record, and any mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Character references are often submitted as part of the evidence presented to the tribunal to demonstrate a player's good character or remorse.

However, there have been instances where character references have been criticized for not accurately reflecting the truth or being biased. In some cases, references have been submitted by individuals with close ties to the players or their clubs, potentially influencing the tribunal's decision.

One notable example occurred in 2019 when Essendon's Devon Smith was suspended for two matches for striking Collingwood's Brodie Mihocek during a game. Smith's teammate, Joe Daniher, submitted a character reference stating that Smith was an "incredible person" and "one of the most respectful and humble players" he had ever met. However, Daniher later admitted that he had not spoken to Smith about the incident before submitting the reference and had based his comments on his general impression of Smith rather than any knowledge of the specific incident.

The use of character references in the AFL tribunal system has been a subject of controversy for some time. Critics argue that they can be misleading and inconsistent, and that the tribunal should focus solely on the facts of the case and the applicable rules rather than personal opinions or biases.

In response to these concerns, some have suggested that the AFL should eliminate the use of character references altogether or limit their impact on tribunal decisions. Others argue that the tribunal should be more transparent in its decision-making process and provide clearer guidelines for what types of character evidence are admissible.

Ultimately, the AFL will need to carefully consider the role of character references in its disciplinary process and weigh the potential benefits against the risks of inconsistency and potential bias. It remains to be seen whether the league will take action to address this issue and how it will impact the future of suspensions and penalties in the AFL.