Adelaide Crows to appeal against Shane McAdam’s three-game ban for bump on Giants’ Jacob Wehr

Adelaide will appeal against the three-match ban given to forward Shane McAdam for a high bump as the fallout from the first-round flashpoint continues.

The Crows had until noon on Wednesday to lodge any appeal after McAdam expressed disappointment with the extent of his suspension, and the club revealed its stance in a short statement on social media on this morning.

The appeal is expected to be heard on Thursday.

McAdam was suspended for rough conduct for his bump on GWS’ Jacob Wehr.

“It was never my intention to harm Jacob (Wehr) and I am glad that he didn’t sustain any injury,” McAdam said after the tribunal hearing.

“I am disappointed with the outcome of the tribunal and understand the club will consider any avenue to appeal the decision.”

Adelaide’s Tom Duggan QC told the tribunal there was no severe head contact when McAdam chiefly made contact with Wehr’s chest and shoulder, dispossessing the Giant of the ball.

“In that sense, it’s entirely legitimate for a bump to be made … it’s perfectly fine,” Duggan told the hearing.

“This is clearly not a high bump because it doesn’t in any way involve the head.

“Yes it was a tough bump but … it was entirely fair.”

McAdam’s ban follows a two-game suspension to Melbourne’s Kysaiah Pickett for a similar bump that felled Western Bulldog Bailey Smith.

The Crows, in their defence of McAdam at Tuesday night’s hearing, used video of Pickett’s hit.

The star Demon accepted a ban and avoided a tribunal hearing, with his bump graded by match review officer Michael Christian on a lower scale than McAdam’s.

Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson, when announcing McAdam’s ban, noted the Pickett bump.

“There appears to be a slightly more glancing aspect to the impact [in the Pickett case] than occurred here,” he said.

“If we are wrong about that, we note that the guidelines say that we are not bound by the examples.

“And it ought not be assumed that we would necessarily grade impact in the Pickett matter as high impact, and not severe.

“We emphasise however that we have not and should not [have] considered all of the evidence in that matter.”

AAP/ABC