"But the police still laid the assault charge. There was vision of it,there was video of it,so I pleaded guilty because I thought:'How can you plead not guilty to something that is clearly there in technicolour?'I was convicted and we appealed and I got a good behaviour bond.

"I thought footy back then,you were putting yourself almost into war without weapons but clearly now,maybe it's the vision part of it,I am not saying the police should but the option is available because you are not outside the law of the land. That's the view I have come with over the years."

WA Police Force Commissioner Chris Dawson said while it was rare for police to lay criminal charges from an incident in professional sport,and acknowledged that the AFL had its own processes,police would be assessing the incident.

“We will make an assessment on this incident as we would with other matters of public
interest,and we would encourage any parties directly connected and concerned with this
matter to contact WA Police Force,” Dawson said.

“Physical contact on the footy field is expected. The central issue here is what should be
governed by the sporting code and what falls within the criminal realm."

Eagles chief executive Trevor Nisbett said comments about potential police action were"inflammatory".

"I am not prepared to go there. Some of those inflammatory comments by some people just are unwarranted because everyone knows we have a process in the AFL and the club will take the process to the tribunal. The AFL will deal with it,the player will get the penalty the AFL tribunal deems as deserved in this case,"he said.

He said the Eagles had not contacted the police about the possibility of charges.

"I would be very hopeful that we let the process go through the AFL like all other processes do,"he said.

Matthews reiterated the need for a send-off rule to be debated.

"This is the third incident this year where the send-off rule should have applied,"he said.

"Certainly[Gaff] he will get a significant suspension,six or seven weeks or something like that. In footy,six or seven weeks is mostly all you get,unless you do something worse than that. If you punch someone and there is severe damage,then normally that is about what the AFL,at senior level,the elite level,is what the penalty has been.

"But you have a look at the aftermath of that,what other things,like,for instance,this is the third incident this year in a couple of months where the send-off rule should have applied.

"The fact is,I hope the AFL behind the scenes,are asking themselves the question. Again,the send-off rule to me is not the penalty to the player Gaff,because he is going to get the[suspension],but it's the actual evening up of the game that one player,Brayshaw,is lost to Fremantle,therefore Gaff should be lost to the Eagles."

Matthews said the role of the video review official needed to be upgraded.

"I think we need to upgrade the video reviewing official. I don't know how upgrade that position is but it has become a really important position in footy,in my opinion,"he said.

"The goal review is based on whoever is the individual person or two doing the video review part of the process and the same with the send off rule. The field umpire wouldn't have even seen this incident.

"They wouldn't even know about it. It's the video reviewer that is the person that says:'No,that was obviously a reportable offence,obviously the victim player is gone for the day'. Once we know that,the other player is gone for the day as well. It just should be in place in my view."