Cricket
Racing
Rugby
League
Motorsport
Football
Golf
Combat Sports
Basketball
Tennis
Other Sports
Sport Nation
EXCLUSIVE: Laura Kane comments on Curtis, MRO matrix, red cards & more
SEN • April 30th, 2025 12:30 pm
In an SEN exclusive, Laura Kane, the AFL’s Executive General Manager of Football, joined Gerard Whateley on Wednesday morning.
Her appearance came off the back of the three-week suspension to North Melbourne’s Paul Curtis which was upheld at the Tribunal.
Kane touched on a number of topics specific to the tackle and how the AFL is handling such matters.
She answered all of the questions on SEN’s Whateley.
Last night’s judgment at the Tribunal was comprehensive. What did you make of it?
“It's a really hard one. I thought the judgment was comprehensive, but I thought the incident was a really, really hard one.
“The really challenging part was the MRO's decision to decide whether that was a tackle and an accident that Josh (Sinn) was concussed or, in fact, careless as was found.
“Clearly didn't think it was intentional, and I think the tricky part is what happens next, once it's careless, what happens next when there's an injury?
“Ultimately, the Tribunal had available to them the opportunity to overturn that, and they didn't, so we take that guidance, but certainly understand the difficulty in this one.”
Do you think Paul Curtis is unlucky?
“The really difficult part is that nuanced decision between a careless tackle and a legal tackle.
“You referred to the comprehensive decision of the Tribunal outlined the elements that they felt made that tackle careless, the pinning of the arms, the positioning of the opposition player's head and, ultimately, the injury.
“So, not unlucky, but we understand how difficult it is to make those decisions as quickly as the players are expected to make those decisions.
“I can certainly understand the frustration and in some parts the confusion, and that's our job to articulate what happened and try to help people learn from it.”
What do you say to the significant portion of the football community that goes, we treasure the rundown tackle, and this is another little bit of our game that's been compromised?
“It’s really important feedback to us from the fans, but also from our players.
“What I've reflected on overnight is probably the three weeks being somewhat of a jarring element of this.
“The discussion that could be had is, is there available to us a sliding scale? And would that frustration, or would that sentiment be there if it was less than three weeks? I don't know. But I think that's a really worthy discussion to have.”
It has served you well to have concussion as severe impact and three weeks, but sensible voices are starting to weigh in going - Is it really three weeks? Does it undermine the severity of concussion if you do have a sliding scale?
“We’ve been really clear in our efforts to make the game safer, so that part is really clear.
“The players and the clubs have done a terrific job at adjusting technique and style, and adjusting how they make those split-second decisions. So that part we know is possible.
“It’s not to minimise the outcome, it's to acknowledge that sometimes we are dealing with moments in time and decisions that you make. Now, I'm mindful that there's still an appeal available here, so going into the details of this case are tricky.
“But just cases generally, maybe there is some discussion to be had around if the technique looks, sounds and feels like this, maybe it's not three weeks, but it's certainly not meant to move away from our position of wanting to make the game safer.”
Where would that level of flexibility potentially come? In a table, in a judgment, or indeed maybe at the Tribunal?
“I think that MRO is a good place to start there. The matrix has served us well and has enabled us to have consistency.
“When we have these cases like this one, where people want some clarity or are after more information about what could they do or how could the outcome be different, the MRO's ability to make a decision and communicate that with clubs at first instance then enables them to work out whether they want to appeal it or not.”
Will you play any active role in trying to make sure that this one actually gets absorbed?
“Any time we have a situation where the players are asking us for clarity, it is on us to try and give them that clarity and education, you can only go so far, with a clip.
“It's also about spending time with them, it’s talking to them, it’s about listening to what they think and how they make decisions in those split seconds.
“I think they are really clear on our position around safety, and they're with us and they're supportive. And I think the football community is with us too.
“We know the football can still be as thrilling and as exciting, but we want to make sure the players are clear, so how we do that might be different for every club.”
What is the discussion around the rundown tackle heading into Round 8?
“It is a great part of our game, and we know that coaches still want that tackle to be laid, and they want it to be laid with some level of force because they want to win the ball.
“They want the free kick, they want to get possession, and we know the desire to win is really, really strong.
“What we're dealing with, we're in the margins, and that's hard, that is really, really hard.
“So that's why listening to the feedback, even overnight, last night, this morning on the drive here, even just the (SEN Breakfast) boys before is how can we have a different, a sliding scale available to us to capture this?
“I don't know what that looks like yet, but I think it's a really worthy discussion to have, and people have a really good understanding of this space, and our players certainly do.
“But we want to see all the great elements of our game from this Thursday night.”
Is that an end-of-season discussion?
“We usually have it throughout the season. It's not a change that would apply in season, and then we make those decisions ahead of the following year.
“It’s one that I think we should start having, and as we've had a live example over the past week, it's a worthy one to have to start having now.”
The other element in the judicial system is Leigh Matthews made a watertight case around what a red card would look like in the AFL. Have you heard that and do you have a view on that currently?
“I’ve heard the red card quite a few times since being in the AFL.
“I understand it, and I think that to its core, people don't want to see behaviour that goes outside of the lines, and people don't want to see behaviour that's really poor, snap judgments, and so on.
“So that part is good, that's a noble cause, we want to see that eradicated and a punishment immediately.
“What I have learned around the umpires making those decisions and what we have available to us at home on multiple angles is different to what the umpires see with their eyes. The room for error is there, and that's been our apprehension, but these reasons are really valid, and they're hard to argue with.
“If you go to the reason why, it's we don't want to see particular types of behaviour, how can we try and get there without the umpires having to make a decision on a red card?”
“I’d heard Leigh’s initial positioning around red cards and we'd been loathe to go there with umpiring, but I understand the review (system giving out reds).
“It's not something we've looked at in terms of implementing, but it's certainly something we’ve listened to feedback on, and heard people's reasoning and how and who could administer it, but it's not something we've looked at in terms of implementation anytime soon.”
