Because they suspended Gibbs in an identical incident. Consistency.
As said, 2 wrongs dont make it right
if you think the Gibbs call was wrong, then you can support Haynes suspension for the sake of consistancy, the only thing worse then inconsistancy is being consistantly WRONG.
I believe there is marked differences in both cases, which makes Gibbs incident worse, but i think his charge was harsh and i dont believe Hayne should be charged, he did all he could at that speed to avoid dangerous contact. These things happen in RL. Thats why its the toughest collision sport in the world.
My simple point is stated above. Being wrong for the sake of consistancy WORSE than inconsistancy.
My example, if one bloke gets sent to prision falsely, should we send the next bloke to prision for close to identical circumstances, knowing full well its the wrong decision, just for consistancy's sake? No.
The Gibbs call was wrong, we all seem to universially agree with that, so suspending Hayne for consisntancy purposes only continues the injustice... no one can bring back Gibbs for those games but we can end this ridiculous "precedent" with the CORRECT ruling here with Hayne. And i believe that is what will happen