TOPIC:

They would of looked at downgrading the charge by it being Reckless/Negligent, of low impact, but high contact, therefore it can be seen as just a free kick and no charge to answer.
Therefore he is now in the position of fully clear on all fronts.
Anything intentional and low impact would have been given time or Reckless/Negligent with medium impact also would have attracted a penalty.

Cheers Above and Beyond, certainly explains it for me and now definately makes sense.

How do they determine low impact? Is it what they deem from looking at the contest? The result of the impact on the opposition plaer? or a combination of both.

Henderson did get up a lil heavy and was moving his jaw like he had copped a fairly heavy hit....although from the footage I would have said that he just brushed him. It must be a combination of the two, and hence the low impact call.

The easiest way is determine out of 10 the contact in regards to impact. I would of said 2-3/10. Also the effect it has on the player. Did he play out the game, did he leave the field, did he continue straight away and didn't suffer any injuries from the hit.
Hence findings showed Reckless/Negligent (which is lower than intentional) and low impact as player continued to play straight away with no issues.
Verdict = high contact and free kick. Move on.

I think the maxim 'rules for some and different rule for others' is apposite here.

True Anchor, therefore it is graded Reckless/Negligent not Intentional which is nearly always automatic trouble. Betts case was intentional and medium impact therefore sits around the 3 week bracket.