Opinion
A weak suspension: How the AFL mishandled the Miller-Zorko incident
Andrew Stafford
AFL correspondent in QueenslandAfter the AFL retrospectively and euphemistically found the Gold Coast’s Touk Miller guilty of “conduct unbecoming” for his tackle on the Brisbane Lions’ Dayne Zorko last Saturday, suspending Miller for one match, there remains a mystery.
What took them so long?
Zorko called out Miller’s actions to the umpire immediately. Video of the incident, slowed down for maximum wince-factor, has been widely circulated and discussed since the match.
In a statement released by the Suns on Thursday night, Miller said his intention was always to execute a fair tackle.
“It was not my intention to harm Dayne and if that has occurred from my actions I would like to apologise to him,” Miller said.
Did the match review officer not see Miller appearing to grab Zorko’s genitals?
Apparently not: according to the AFL’s statement on Thursday, it deemed the vision inconclusive. Accordingly, it neither cited Miller, nor referred him to the tribunal.
In response to this chorus of crickets – a silence as bizarre as the reluctance of grown men to utter the word “testicles” on television – Zorko went much further.
He broke the players’ “code of silence” that dictates that only in the rarest of circumstances are opponents dobbed in for reportable offences.
“It’s interesting, you’re allowed to grab the groin region now and squeeze it and do whatever you want to it,” he told SENQ.
Zorko went on to describe his “groin region” as “quite bruised”. Again, putting on record the extent of an injury goes dramatically against the bro code.
But there is nothing brotherly about grabbing another man’s genitals and giving them a twist. Nor has there ever been much fraternal respect between Zorko and Miller.
Dayne Zorko and Touk Miller.Credit: Archives
Obviously, there’s nothing sexual about such actions on the sporting field. But the so-called “squirrel grip” can often be a gesture of contempt, dominance and humiliation.
It’s about power.
For those who have been watching Zorko and Miller for a long time – the pair have a well-documented history of antagonism dating back to 2018 – there may be a temptation to giggle.
But it only takes a few seconds and a step back to see that it’s a terrible look for the game, especially at a time when discussions around touching and consent are so charged.
For the AFL to have dithered for the better part of a week in dealing with it is remarkable.
It should also be noted that Zorko has been involved in a succession of ugly incidents across his decorated 243-game career.
Twice, he has been suspended for “making unnecessary contact with the eye region” (another great AFL euphemism) of opponents, most recently after the round 11 game against Adelaide.
He has been sanctioned seven times for striking, and four for misconduct. In 2019, there were allegations of spitting that the match review office could not prove to its satisfaction.
Zorko later said he would use the experience to become “a better person”. Nine’s Caroline Wilson later reported that Zorko had copped some very personal sledging himself that night.
Nevertheless, the picture painted is of a ruthless competitor who has always played on the edge of what is considered acceptable on the sporting field.
But while Zorko may have his own case of white-line fever, none of this justifies or excuses non-incidental contact with an opponent’s genitalia, which is unacceptable in any context.
This brings us to the one-match suspension, which Miller has accepted, while stating it was always his intention to execute a fair tackle.
The Suns have also defended their captain, stating that Miller has “built a reputation as a fair and strong leader who is admired by the entire AFL community”.
That may be so. But, having accepted the penalty, is missing one match for such a charge – once sustained – really enough? Does a charge of “conduct unbecoming” cut it?
Former Essendon champion Matthew Lloyd certainly doesn’t think so, telling Nine’s Footy Classified that he believed such actions were on “the highest end of serious offences”.
That’s how any incidents of this sort should be viewed in future.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.