Pickett concedes he hit Starcevich at a reasonable speed.
AFL argues rather than trying to minimise the impact, Pickett was trying to increase the force of the impact when he collided with Starcevich. Pickett disagrees.
AFL questioning Pickett's evidence about making minimal to no contact to Starcevich's face. "I suggest you did make impact to his head as the footage shows." Pickett disagrees that the footage shows he hit Starcevich's face, partly because of how blurry it is.
AFL argues Pickett made a swinging arm action. Pickett says he disagrees and that it was a tackling motion, and if he swung the arm it was when he made contact with the shoulder.
Pickett says Starcevich dropped slightly as he went to kick the ball, which was at the same time the contact was made.
Pickett's cross-examination is complete and that is all of Richmond's evidence.
The AFL speaks to the issue of whether the impact was low or medium. Gleeson points to the guidelines - extent of force and injury. "There's no injury as such but you know from the footage ... Starcevich hits the ground pretty hard, stays down for a fair while, looks as if he's in some stage of distress ... though he ultimately takes the kick."
AFL points out the guidelines say there being no injury can still result in a grading as harsh as severe.
AFL points to the guideline that says "strong consideration will be given to the potential to cause injury", which specifically mentions "a forceful round-arm swing". "It was a round-arm motion and it was forceful and it made head-high contact with the player. It's quite open to interpretation that contrary to Mr Pickett's evidence there was meaningful and significant contact made to the head of Starcevich. It's difficult to conclude there was no forceful contact to the head."
AFL: It's quite open to you to conclude that a swinging action like this, with momentum and speed and with the way the contact was made, will almost invariably attract a medium impact designation given the deference to head-high injuries in the guidelines. It would almost be an unusual outcome for this to be rated the lowest category.
Richmond argues with the idea low impact is "unusual". Points to examples in the guidelines, including one that had "a higher potential to cause serious injury" was graded as low.
Richmond also points out the lack of injury caused. "That word potential - was there capacity, realistically, for it to be worse than it was? In my submission the worst-case scenario eventuated; that potential resulted in no injury being suffered by Mr Starcevich."
Richmond says there was a mixture of contact, "most of it to the outer shoulder and chest area", and "some of it high", but "the bulk of the force that was used here was absorbed low - not high".
Richmond: Mr Pickett isn't lucky there wasn't further injury, but he was unlucky to get Mr Starcevich high at all.
Richmond: "This wasn't some kind of wild swinging motion, but the movement of the arm is in a manner of someone attempting to undertake a legitimate tackle."
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-tribunal-2021-live-live-blog-updates-lachie-plowman-marlion-pickett-nick-holman-start-time-suspensions-news/news-story/5b2af39373a8c35829b2efa5a162649b
