To his eternal credit, David King gets this when so very, very few in the footy community do.
He is dead right when he talks about the action of running at a defenceless opponent being the one that needs to be stamped out because it is that precipitous action that magnifies the chances of a horrible injury occurring.
Focusing on 'the outcome' or the 'accidental' nature of the head clash or even peripheral stuff like whether he left the ground or raised an elbow is missing the point.
Like David King, I find it hard to believe anyone could argue, in the current climate and under the AFL's grading of the incident, that Dangerfield should get anything less than 3-4 weeks to sit in the grandstand and ponder the meaning of 'duty of care'.
If the AFL tribunal does not send the required message this time around, when will it?