For those expressing their deep concern about Carlton ruckman Mathew Kreuzer, there is good news — apparently he is OK.

Well, so far as we know.

One can only hope the concussion Kreuzer suffered on Saturday when he was tipped head-first into the Docklands Stadium turf with his arms pinned to his side will not be one of a series of cumulative head knocks that causes serious brain damage and renders his post-football career a hazy, debilitated twilight.

Yes, apologies, this does sound melodramatic. It is, short of early death, the very worst-case scenario.

But a week after a US study revealed 110 of 111 NFL players who suspected they suffered brain damage from repeated head knocks were posthumously proven correct, can we afford to tip-toe around this subject?

So let's hope the Kreuzer story has a happy ending, because his health is the main subject of the weekend's biggest AFL story, right?

This is all about a man who suffered a serious head injury and was unable to take further part in a game. Isn't it?

No, of course it isn't. Kreuzer's health would only be the story in a game where hollow sentiments about the "sanctity of the head" were not replaced by self-interest in the time it takes to say "but I backed Patrick Dangerfield to win the Brownlow!".

And there we have it. Instead of Kreuzer's wellbeing, the media focus was almost instantly the Geelong opponent responsible for his plight — complete with moans of sympathy for Dangerfield from media cheerleaders, misleading "precedents" intended to ensure his acquittal and self-serving testimony from Dangerfield's coach and even Dangerfield himself.

There was no #PutOutYourCats campaign at the time of writing, but I had not read the Geelong Advertiser.

Thus, inevitably, what should be the most straightforward of match review panel decisions was instead subsumed by irrelevant side issues such as Dangerfield's Brownlow eligibility and his good character.

Even good blokes sometimes must cop a ban

None of this is to cast Dangerfield as an assassin, or even a willing culprit. He seems an intelligent, engaged and good-humoured man and is, indisputably, among the best and fairest players of this generation.

As Dangerfield's defenders were quick to say, accidents happen, it's just that they are far more likely to happen when you have a player pinned by the arms and help propel him forward, head-first, into the ground.

This should be apparent to those in the jockocracy who leapt to Dangerfield's defence. Surely, more than anyone, ex-players now appreciate the potential long-term consequences of the damage suffered by Kreuzer.

Back-to-back Brownlows? … even great blokes sometimes need to serve a ban. ( AAP: Julian Smith )

That should be apparent even to Geelong coach Chris Scott, who virtually demanded Dangerfield be cleared.

Although anyone who has regularly observed Scott and his twin, Brad, in the coach's box knows that what makes them identical is not their appearance. It is that neither has ever seen a justifiable free kick paid against their teams.

Most reprehensible were those who thought first of the impact of Dangerfield's potential suspension on the Brownlow Medal — and, even more ghastly, Brownlow Medal betting — than the precedent a "not guilty" finding would create.

On Monday afternoon, the AFL match review panel will spin its wheel. The only sensible outcome is a brief suspension for Dangerfield that will entrench the game's commitment to protecting the head.

If this story was about Kreuzer, the unfortunate victim of a clumsy tackle, this would not be in doubt.

But the macho ex-jocks, the vested interests and the ill-informed have somehow cast Dangerfield as the potential victim and forsaken the ruckman with the sore head.

Hopefully, the waters have not been muddied sufficiently for the MRP to clear Dangerfield, a decision that would fly in the face of both common sense and, potentially, the wellbeing of the game's greatest assets.

Phelps and a shark attract more focus than our Dolphins

It says something about this year's FINA world championships in Budapest that there was more interest in a race between Michael Phelps and a virtual shark. (The shark won despite the howls of protest that it wasn't the real thing.)

Despite the relative lack of interest, it proved to be an excellent event with several post-supersuit world records broken. Excellent for everyone, that is, except Australia, which finished a lacklustre eighth on the medal table after winning two bronze medals on the final day.

Emily Seebohm secured Australia's only gold medal in Budapest. ( Reuters: David Balogh )

Emily Seebohm's 200-metres backstroke gold medal spared Australia the embarrassment of failing to win a single gold medal, while Emma McKeon's Trojan effort in winning four silver and two bronze medals was perhaps even more meritorious.

But, despite the inevitable "Aussie flop" headlines, the seemingly modest Australian results should be put in context.

That champion sprinter Cate Campbell was doing her best work with microphone instead of goggles while she enjoys a gap year was indicative of where a world championship held three years before the next Olympics sits.

Meanwhile, her sister Bronte struggled with a shoulder injury throughout the meet.

Four silver and two bronze made Emma McKeon the most prolific Aussie woman ever at a world championships. ( Reuters: Michael Dalder )

At the same time, there were genuine reasons to be excited about the performances of some younger swimmers, particularly a pair of 16-year-olds — Ariarne Titmus, who anchored the silver medal winning 4x200m freestyle relay team and Kaylee McKeown, who finished fourth behind Seebohm in the 200m backstroke.

Assuming they sustain their development through next year's Commonwealth Games and beyond, Titmus will be 19 and McKeown 18 when the 2020 Tokyo Olympics are held, notionally entering the peak of their careers.

Budapest might then be best remembered as the place where champions made their first splash, not as the disappointment by which it has been portrayed by some.