Thank you for responding! We can agree to disagree on our interpretation. I view it as a tackle by Coles on Hooper which was in progress at the point of impact. As the tackle was in progress Hooper was being pulled to the ground. At full speed (again I recommend people watch it like that as opposed to the slow motion TMO approach) it results in what I would call a sudden change in body height. You’ll of course recognise that the mitigating circumstances are not cumulative; you don’t need lots of them to call it “mitigation”, so I am unclear what your reference to “didn’t use arm” means? That is not the topic of my contention and is not one of the “factors against mitigation”. I appreciate that something being clear and obvious is subjective (you’ll struggle to find unanimous agreement on many decisions) but one has to only glance at twitter and the likes of Ross Tucker who concedes that it is not “red all day” and actually alternative interpretations of the situation are reasonable. To be clear I’m not trying to flog anything. I’ve said several times I recognise people view this decision differently and don’t begrudge them for it.