AN ANGRY Mark Williams has accused the AFL tribunal of “tearing at the fabric of the game” following its decision to ban Power midfielder Shaun Burgoyne for three weeks.

Port Adelaide has decided against appealing Burgoyne’s suspension for engaging in rough conduct on Hawthorn’s Sam Mitchell, but Williams said the “integrity of the game” was at stake if players weren’t permitted to brace for impact, and also make contact in their quest for the ball.

“I’d say that 99 times out of 100 nothing will happen to the opposition player and it will just be play on,” Williams said of the contest between Burgoyne and Mitchell.

“The contact was incidental, it was accidental and I'm disappointed for Shaun, but certainly, I'm disappointed for the game because I have absolutely no idea what you are supposed to do in that situation, other than pull out of the situation, and I don't think any of us will accept that.

"This is not about Shaun Burgoyne, it is for a second, the rest of it is about the game and as great as the AFL were a couple years ago about protecting the head over the ball, this is about protecting the integrity of the game.

“It is vital for us to get this right because honestly it tears at the fabric of the game. That’s how important it is.”

The Power contemplated appealing the decision handed down by the AFL tribunal but, according to Williams, decided it would be a “complete waste of time and money”.

"We've attempted to appeal before and it's very difficult. It's a very legal system. It's based on legal argument and you just find it very difficult to win a legal argument,” he said.

"The advice I’ve received suggests that all we can do now is to make a legal argument. It would be a complete waste of time and money for our case, but I'm sure other, richer clubs would spend the money.”

Williams debated the tribunal’s ruling that Burgoyne had a ‘realistic opportunity’ to avoid the high contact with Mitchell and queried whether any members of the tribunal had ever been coaches who had tried to teach players how to contest the ball.

"Contested balls are about winning under pressure and winning under contact,” he said.

“When you are a metre away from a person approaching the ball and you have your eye on the ball and the other person is running in the same direction, it is unrealistic to think that you are not going to make a collision.

“Footballers are brave people to play the game, every one of them. We pay our money to come and see a contested game where there are collisions, there are accidents and everyone takes the opportunity of understanding they are putting themselves in some sort of danger.

"In fact, our side has often been accused of not playing contested football. In the situation where you're a metre away from the ball, the player should be protected if he's putting his head over the ball, in this case he certainly wasn't, and our player is allowed to contest the ball.

"The skill of the game revolves around possessing the ball with contact, and that's exactly what Shaun tried to do. Others will talk about did he deviate? Yes, he deviated.

“Who cares if he deviated? He's still going for the ball, and realistically the other person, Mitchell, thought he was going to be in a contested situation, because 99 out of 100 times when you get to that situation that is what is going to occur.

"The only thing I'm concerned about is a situation where the ball will be contested and the player has not got his head over the ball. Surely both are allowed to run against each other and make contact while still going at the ball? You can do two things at once.

“For those who don't think you can [do two things at once], come out and I'll show you how you do it. I'm very happy to be a coach and show whoever doesn't understand that basic part of the game exactly how to win that ball.”

Plain and simple, Williams said the tribunal had “got it wrong”.

“I applaud the AFL for the stance they took about people putting their head over the ball and getting complete and full protection. I think they've gone down the right path in that regard, but I think they've got this wrong,” he said.

“I think the people there [at the AFL] are big enough and smart enough to look at this decision and re-look at it again, because this incident cannot be viewed as a three-week penalty.

“What I saw was the Hawthorn medical staff probably overreact and get the stretcher out there, so Mitchell had to get on it and he had to spend 20 minutes off.

“For that person [Mitchell] to then get votes in the game and dominate the game, please ...this is right up there with the most bizarre thing I've ever seen.

"I'm sure the AFL coaches association have got a role to play here and no other team would be satisfied with this result. We're talking about one of the most skillful, fair players in the game, being eliminated from the game for three weeks with an accident. It just should not happen.

“It’ll take a little bit of time for Shaun to come back from this I’m sure, especially and unfortunately being Indigenous Round this week. He does so much for the AFL in regard to pushing the indigenous side of it and also so much for the AFL community.

“It’s disappointing he won’t be there to celebrate that this week.”