IF the AFL didn't properly crack down on Alastair Clarkson in the pre-season, then it went overboard on Kenny Hinkley.
Choosing to use its catch-all Rule 2.3 (a) Conduct Unbecoming option against Hinkley, the same one it used against Clarkson for his use of a homophobic word against an opponent, the AFL has now relinquished any right to cash-in on provocatively fixturing the next Port Adelaide-Hawthorn match in a prime slot, such as round one or Gather Round.
>> GET THE LATEST FROM DAMIAN BARRETT
That would've been a marketing dream, but scheduling the game in a marquee slot would be hypocritical, because clearly in headquarters' eyes, there was nothing to celebrate or promote out of the Hinkley-Jack Ginnivan-James Sicily post-match drama.
The 2024 season has been massively successful on so many levels. The game itself is in great shape and compelling to watch, the Steve Hocking-instituted stand-the-mark and 6-6-6 rules proving to be among the greatest changes ever made. Crowds are up, TV numbers are huge, general media metrics are big, fan engagement has never been higher.
A good old-fashioned bit of post-match argy-bargy by a couple of old-school operators in Hinkley and Sicily should have, in my eyes, been given the tut-tut response, not the most extreme conduct unbecoming one.
I understand and respect the AFL could not have walked past the Hinkley semi-final moment, given it occurred a week after another $20,000 finding made against GWS's football boss Jason McCartney. But just as Clarkson's error was a homophobic word, McCartney's was making contact with a player from the other team. And both Clarkson and McCartney had priors in the match-day behaviour space.
Hinkley's "you're not flying anywhere, Jack" retort, may have been unbecoming conduct for a senior coach, but to me it wasn't in the Rule 2.3 (a) Conduct Unbecoming ballpark.
"As we reiterated last week, opposition officials and players inappropriately engaging each other is something we don't want to see because of the potential to escalate and the example that it sets for football at lower levels and we are disappointed the moment took away from what was one of the great finals matches," read the AFL statement against Hinkley which was released last Sunday night.
I would argue the moment, as unintended and spontaneous as it was, emphatically enhanced what was one of the great finals matches, won by underdog Port Adelaide and off the back of a week of psychologically drawing on the provocative social media musings of Ginnivan, who said he would "see u in 14 days" to Swan Brodie Grundy, implying that the Hawks had already won through to the preliminary final.
Football needs unscripted, emotional theatre. It is what truly establishes rivalries, and supporters often derive as much connection to their teams and players via those non-athletic moments as they do a mark or goal or match-saving tackle. Football is competing against not just other sports, but other entertainment forms, and there was genuine entertainment after the final siren last Friday night.
I didn't see one aspect of the Hinkley moment compromising the game's integrity. Almost certainly nothing would have come of it had James Sicily not already been dealing with the sports trauma of missing a goal which would have sent the Hawks to the preliminary final.
I hope that the critical opinions delivered against Hinkley by some of the toughest former players we have seen, people who just happened to be ex-Hawk champions in Dermott Brereton, Luke Hodge and Jordan Lewis, weren't part of the AFL's "reading of the room" on this matter.
I also hope there was no weight given to Sam Mitchell's ordinary public attempt to suddenly pitch Ginnivan, who has now been in the AFL system four years and who has created headlines on and off the field for three of those years, as a "very young player" who had "aggressive words" directed at him by a "much older man".
He's had a brilliant season, Mitchell, and he was clearly emotional at losing a semi-final he expected to win. But clearly he, and those ex-Hawks, have been thinking it OK all season to get in the faces of opponents in so many ways without expecting it to come back. There was more than a touch of sooking up at the Hinkley moment from the Hawks.
The words 'conduct unbecoming' are interesting in so many ways. Maybe the AFL should look at the manner in which a couple of Hawks players may have, or may not have, staged for potential damage to the head when tackled in that semi-final.
They're very good, the Hawks, in this space. And they're not on their own. A lot of players at a lot of clubs successfully tried it on throughout the season. I'd argue trying to rort a rule which was brought into protect the head is behaviour more aligned with conduct unbecoming than anything Kenny did after the match. That growing habit should be properly looked into post-season.
