Both Essendon and St Kilda have fallen short at their respective AFL Tribunal hearings.

Bombers forward Peter Wright fronted the Tribunal after being directly referred by the AFL's Match Review Officer for a heavy collision with Swans player Harry Cunningham in a marking contest that left the latter with a concussion.

Wright pleaded guilty to the charge of rough conduct, with Essendon hoping to have the length of the suspension set at three matches. The AFL pushed for a minimum of four matches and was successful in the process.

In the second hearing of the evening, St Kilda and forward Max King challenged the MRO's one-game suspension for rough conduct.

The Saints pushed to clear King of the charge, or at the very least lower the graded level of impact from  'medium' to 'low' - which would have resulted in just a fine for King.

Instead, the Tribunal upheld the MRO's charge, seeing the Saints star remain suspended for Round 3.

Here's how both cases played out at the AFL Tribunal...

Saints fail in King challenge

Verdict: St Kilda forward Max King has seen his suspension upheld at the AFL Tribunal, meaning he will miss this week's clash with Essendon. King will next be available for selection in Round 4 when the Saints face Richmond in South Australia.

7:57: The Tribunal is now deliberating. A verdict will come soon.

7:56: Pane (AFL): If Macrae's body did lower, it did so by a very small amount.

7:53: In response to the two pieces of evidence raised by St Kilda, Pane (AFL) notes the first example (Viney on Fogarty) doesn't see the victim's head "whip back" like Macrae's, while the next example (Balta on Sexton) sees the offending player initially make contact with the shoulder before higher contact is made.

7:44: The past 20 minutes have consisted of Anderson submitting his findings on the case, mostly covering guidelines of the game and Tribunal and breaking down the footage whilst pleading for the AFL to consider the impact level should be 'low'.

Anderson has now begun using past examples, including an incident from last year of Melbourne's Jack Viney on Carlton's Lachie Fogarty. That example was graded as 'low' impact.

A second example has been used, with Noah Balta's rough conduct charge on Alex Sexton from earlier this season also brought in as evidence, with that too graded as 'low' impact.

7:17: Adrian Anderson (St Kilda): Max King was entitled to bump.

7:09: Nick Pane (AFL): "Macrae's body is not materially lowered by the tackling action of player Hill."

"The (medium) impact grading is appropriate because the action of bumping a player is an inherently dangerous action that had the potential to cause more suffering."

"It was too little too late. The decision had already been made to bump."

7:01: King: I was aware it was high. I was surprised it ended up being high.

6:56: The Saints are breaking down the footage frame by frame, noting the timing of when King is in a good position to bump Macrae as he is being tackled by Hill, up until the point where Macrae's head height "drops significantly down" before impact.

6:47: King: "As I got closer to Macrae I felt like I could impact the contest physically, whether it be a tackle or a bump.

"I'm running up the ground in a straight direction, Macrae comes across towards me with the ball. At that point I think I can impact the contest. Once he disposes of the ball, it's clear to me I cant tackle him anymore. I'm reasonably close to him so I elect to bump.

"I know I'm taller than most players, so I tend to lower my body as best I can to make shoulder-on-shoulder contact. Despite being taller, I got to a position that was almost lower than [Macrae]

"As he disposed of the ball, I was under the assumption the tackler (Hill) would let go of Macrae. Hill held onto him after Macrae disposed of the ball, which dragged him down at the last minute and below the level I expected to contact him at.

"At the last minute before contact I realised I was committed to the bump. I attempted to turn my body inside to minimise the force."

King says he believes he was successful in reducing the level of impact: "It could have been a lot worse".

6:39pm: Max King has pled not guilty, pushing for 'accidental' instead of 'careless' conduct and that the contact was due to circumstances outside of King's control. Saints note Brad Hill dragged Fin Macrae lower which impacted the result.

The Saints are also pushing for 'low' impact instead of 'medium' if the above argument fails.

Wright hit with four-game ban for Cunningham collision 

Verdict: Essendon's Peter Wright will serve a four-game suspension, meaning he will miss matches against St Kilda, Port Adelaide, the Western Bulldogs and Adelaide. He will next be available in Round 7 when the Bombers face Collingwood.

6:05: The Tribunal is now deliberating, with a verdict to come when the jury returns.

6:01: Tribunal Counsel Jeff Gleeson has labelled the incident as "a fairly conventional marking contest", with the AFL contesting Wright was late to the contest and did not consider that marking the ball was an option.

5:59: AFL Counsel Nick Pane questions Essendon's submission that Wright had his eyes on the ball at all times. Wright was not cross-examined and therefore did not offer evidence to support the Bombers' claim.

5:53: Essendon accept the level of impact is "severe", however argue it is "not an extreme or high level" on the severe impact spectrum. 

5:49: Ihle: "[Wright] accepts that this was careless in the sense that what he did choose to do was not consistent with his duty of care".

5:43: Ihle: "If Mr. Wright was seeking to increase the force he would not have led with his previously hurt shoulder, and instead his left/good shoulder."

5:38: Essendon are pushing for a three-game suspension. The Bombers are hoping Wright's contrition toward Cunningham post-game aids their push.

Ben Ihle (Essendon) has noted Wright was tracking the ball with his eyes and during his approach to the contest, but was required to make a "split-second decision".

5:32: Nick Pane (AFL): "It's not just the contact, it's the decision to leave the ground in the way that he did (that is significant)".

In response to the physiotherapist's report: "He chose to jump off the ground and cannon into player Cunningham. Whatever technique he may have developed to protect his shoulder does not justify his actions in leaving the ground in the way that he did."

5:27: A report from a physiotherapist notes that it is not unreasonable to expect Wright, who underwent shoulder surgery early last year, to have developed certain techniques and positions to protect his shoulder from "combative situations".

5:21pm: The AFL is pushing for a suspension of no less than four matches for Wright. Essendon have pleaded guilty to the charge but will argue to reduce the sanction.