Shock and bewilderment: Making sense of Geelong concussion bombshell

We lived a journey of shock to complete bewilderment yesterday.

Shock that Geelong was the club exposed as the organisation willing to agree to a secret deal that would have one of its repeatedly concussed players assume legal risk for any future brain injury.

That’s the shock.

And the complete bewilderment over the vanilla statement from the AFL and AFLPA last night.

Forget sanctions for Geelong, there wasn’t even a critical tone in the statement. That statement only just stopped short of congratulating the Cats.

It answered absolutely nothing.

And if the Cats have done nothing wrong then why do we still have so many questions over something so secret that the player’s manager at the time didn’t even know about it?

Why are there so many holes? When did the AFL know about this? Who knew and to what level? Was it the player who raised the idea of the waiver? Or was it the club who raised the idea of the waiver with the player?

Was the concussion panel ruling so complex they felt compelled tp protect themselves? Was it ever going to stand up in court anyway? Would the waiver still be there if it wasn’t reported on?

Instead, we’re just told that any clubs in future looking to propose arrangements that impact a player’s legal rights need to be approved by the league and AFLPA.

That’s it. All done and dusted then?

Craig Drummond, who was Geelong president at the time, his board approved the off-the-books agreement. The club initially denied existed before coming clean.

He is now the chairman of the AFL Commission.

What did he know - then and now?

“Storm in a teacup”: Cornes & King debate Cats concussion saga

Because his statement yesterday told us what we already knew, all with the seriousness of concussion and how serious the AFL tells us it takes it.

“The healthy and safety they are seemingly comfortable with a club absolving itself of the risk should things go wrong. Putting a player out there who would not have the usual protection that a safe workplace should afford.

How can this cut it? How can there not be a level of culpability?

Clubs are getting fined left, right and centre for all sorts of things. It doesn’t wash.

We're not barracking for a club suspension but clubs are getting fined $20,000 for umpire contact.

This after Carlton were fined $75,000 for the Elijah Hollands case, Ken Hinkley was fined $20,000 for flying an imaginary plane and telling someone they weren’t flying anywhere.

But a club circumvents the AFL by deliberately not being transparent about this contract – for two years – and we’re all sweet here? Not accountable to anyone.

This is where we are done a major disservice.

Andrew Dillon’s next presser will be fascinating.

Not to be a tin hat wearer… but you can’t help but think if it was Essendon, Carlton, Port Adelaide, whoever, that they would have copped it.