Jack Viney

[LukeParkerno1]

Question is: Does anyone at all agree with it? Anyone?

Sort of on the fence, but I thought before the night he would be guilty, especially after the Fyfe decision.

 

[Modified Dog]

The game has changed so much and is so much quicker it begs the question why the tribunal has a jury of ex-footy players who belong in the dark ages.

Rubbish comment. The age of the tribunal members has nothing to do with this decision.
Check yourself, mate. People aren't senile when they reach 40.

The verdict against Viney is actually consistent with previous rulings made since 2009. His bump is not much different to the bumps which saw Buddy Franklin suspended 3 times from 2009-2012.

The problem lies with the players who lower themselves into contests (hoping to get a free kick?) and leave themselves open to getting hurt.
I think Lynch himself contributed to his injury - watch him lose his feet and fall into Viney's shoulder. Same thing happened with a few of Buddy's bumps. He never aimed at their heads.

AFL footballers have developed bad instincts due to the over-umpiring of the high contact rule. They no longer protect themselves like footballers learned to do in the past. The AFL has pretty much removed the bump from the game. As a result, players have no fear and they leave themselves wide open - look at Marc Murphy's broken jaw vs Luke Hodge last year.

 

[Benno_900]

Unpopular opinion here...

Lining up a player who is already being tackled for a bump which he has no way of avoiding or protecting himself from should result in a report, whether or not the player is injured as a result.

Bumping in general play is one thing (and should not be punished if executed cleanly), but what Viney did was dangerous and unnecessary.

Look at Lynch in the picture above: wrapped up in a tackle, being brought to ground (both of his feet are off the ground) and with no way to avoid Viney's bump, resulting in a broken jaw. I don't think there was any malice in it, but it was no doubt a dangerous, reckless act. How would you like to be Lynch, both arms pinned and being pulled off your feet as Viney's shoulder connects with your chin coming the other way?

Didn't realise we played stop-motion footy.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

There's a couple of milliseconds between when he gets wrapped up and when Viney lays the bump. No human operates on this level of timing.

Is this incident somehow faster than the dozens of incidents that go before the mrp every week?

 

[Daveismad]

I agree with what mark Robinson said

Mckernan gets two weeks for outright thuggery ...elbowing a bloke to the head

Viney gets two weeks for this

Has the world gone stark raving bloody mad?

This is not what the points system was designed to do.

Ok ...if a player goes for specie mark and comes down on someone's head and breaks their jaw ...do the now get weeks ?

I'm ashamed tonight that our great game has been torn to shreds ...it's been tuned into netball ...no sorry Australian netball league is more physical than our game now

This means the bump is dead

Just dam well say it, you can't bump anyone ...just outlaw full,stop instead of pretending it exists when in fact it simply can't exist anymore

 

[Engimal]

Is this incident somehow faster than the dozens of incidents that go before the mrp every week?

Nope. I was just pointing out how the argument that he was already getting tackled when laid the bump is pretty silly.

 

[wowlace]

Rubbish comment. The age of the tribunal members has nothing to do with this decision. Check yourself, mate. People aren't senile when they reach 40.

The verdict against Viney is actually consistent with previous rulings made since 2009. His bump is not much different to the bumps which saw Buddy Franklin suspended 3 times from 2009-2012.

The problem lies with the players who lower themselves into contests (hoping to get a free kick?) and leave themselves open to getting hurt.
I think Lynch himself contributed to his injury - watch him lose his feet and fall into Viney's shoulder. Same thing happened with a few of Buddy's bumps. He never aimed at their heads.

AFL footballers have developed bad instincts due to the over-umpiring of the high contact rule. They no longer protect themselves like footballers learned to do in the past. The AFL has pretty much removed the bump from the game. As a result, players have no fear and they leave themselves wide open - look at Marc Murphy's broken jaw vs Luke Hodge last year.

That wasn't a bump, it was collision. No one lined up anyone. All I see is players going for the ball.

 

[tropicaltiger]

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/rd-7-jack-viney-rough-conduct-charge

Watch this vid. So quick, the ball at the last second makes a B line for Lynch when it looked like it was going to bob up again.

I really am dumfounded with Gleesons spin move idea. Simply, there was no time at all for that business. That video really highlights the pace of the incident for me. Blistering.

Unpopular opinion here...

Lining up a player who is already being tackled for a bump which he has no way of avoiding or protecting himself from should result in a report, whether or not the player is injured as a result.

Bumping in general play is one thing (and should not be punished if executed cleanly), but what Viney did was dangerous and unnecessary.

Look at Lynch in the picture above: wrapped up in a tackle, being brought to ground (both of his feet are off the ground) and with no way to avoid Viney's bump, resulting in a broken jaw. I don't think there was any malice in it, but it was no doubt a dangerous, reckless act. How would you like to be Lynch, both arms pinned and being pulled off your feet as Viney's shoulder connects with your chin coming the other way?

you are entitled to your opinion, so heres mine, from your observations and comments i reckon you have never ever played the game over u/12s. age group, sorry mate its all about the afl softening up the game before they get sued.

 

[Whos_Your_Caddy]

Unpopular opinion here...

Lining up a player who is already being tackled for a bump which he has no way of avoiding or protecting himself from should result in a report, whether or not the player is injured as a result.

Bumping in general play is one thing (and should not be punished if executed cleanly), but what Viney did was dangerous and unnecessary.

Look at Lynch in the picture above: wrapped up in a tackle, being brought to ground (both of his feet are off the ground) and with no way to avoid Viney's bump, resulting in a broken jaw. I don't think there was any malice in it, but it was no doubt a dangerous, reckless act. How would you like to be Lynch, both arms pinned and being pulled off your feet as Viney's shoulder connects with your chin coming the other way?

1. Lining him up? He didn't move towards him, he waited to see where the ball was going to go and in the last second braced for contact getting low and keeping his feet on the ground.

2. What do you think his other options were? If he tried to tackle or didn't brace he'd be getting scraped of the ground onto a stretcher. Do you really think any afl player would spin or jump out of the way of that contest? Do you realise how little time he had to make a decision?

 

[Quinz]

Look at Lynch in the picture above: wrapped up in a tackle, being brought to ground (both of his feet are off the ground) and with no way to avoid Viney's bump, resulting in a broken jaw. I don't think there was any malice in it, but it was no doubt a dangerous, reckless act. How would you like to be Lynch, both arms pinned and being pulled off your feet as Viney's shoulder connects with your chin coming the other way?

I wouldn't like to be any of them, and maybe least of all Jack Viney in that situation, because he has three options:

1. The football option- attack the footy, protect yourself at the last moment, and hope that no one gets hurt and you don't get suspended
2. The sacrificial option- move facing straight forward and allow the Lynch-Gorgiou train to run through you, and hope that you don't get your jaw broken
3. The squib option- literally jump out of the way of the conest, and hope your coach doesn't drag you and play you in the reserves next week

Options 2 and 3 cannot be accepted. The AFL has to allow situtations where option 1 is the only legitimate one to occur without penalty.

They have failed in this aspect, spectacularly so, in their crusade to eliminate any injury that results from another player.

 

[master bate]

Is this incident somehow faster than the dozens of incidents that go before the mrp every week?

Yes it is.

That's the entire point.

Even in head clashes like Fyfe or Douglas the players made deliberate actions to go and bump. In this case Viney's action was to stand his ground and brace himself.

The prosecution didn't say don't bump, they said do a spin to get out of the way. That alone tells you it's way different.

 

[wowlace]

you are entitled to your opinion, so heres mine, from your observations and comments i reckon you have never ever played the game over u/12s. age group, sorry mate its all about the afl softening up the game before they get sued.

Not sure if you meant to quote me there. I've never played football full stop.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Nope. I was just pointing out how the argument that he was already getting tackled when laid the bump is pretty silly.

He should take a leaf out Steve Johnson's book and just drop the bump from his repertoire.

 

[GFrost]

They've killed The Bump so they've moved on to murderering The Brace now. What is next?

If you pull your elbows in, make contact and someone gets hurt, you will sit on the sidelines.
If you jump out of the way of oncoming contact, you will sit on the sidelines.

I've never been one to get angsty about tribunals and reports but the AFL have officially tipped over into crazy town and I'm genuinely wondering where they will go next because you can't trust them.

 

[Empire_Persian]

Two players running towards each other - the collision was inevitable. If Viney did not instinctively turn to the side to protect himself and collided into Lynch front on, it would have never been taken to the tribunal. So the tribunal essentially found him guilty of acting instinctively.

 

[Modified Dog]

That wasn't a bump, it was collision. No one lined up anyone. All I see is players going for the ball.

Disagree

It becomes a bump the moment Viney turns side-on to protect himself and braces for impact.

That appears to be the black/white ruling which the MRP have been following.

 

[Engimal]

He should take a leave out Steve Johnson's book and just drop the bump from his repertoire.

The AFL should just ban the bump if they're not going to allow players to use it.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Exactly, and you're also on the money re the media beat up shite. To all of you that think Viney was hard done by watch the incident frame by frame and you will see very clearly that Viney never at any stage had his eyes on the ball. He is clearly focussed on the Crows player and knew exactly what he was about to do. Guilty as charged and deserved a longer stretch.

The problem with frame by frame is that it makes it look like he's got more time than he had.

 

[Syrah]

My god. Was wondering what all the hysteria was about, then I just saw the vision. Absolute joke.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Yes it is.

That's the entire point.

Even in head clashes like Fyfe or Douglas the players made deliberate actions to go and bump. In this case Viney's action was to stand his ground and brace himself.

The prosecution didn't say don't bump, they said do a spin to get out of the way. That alone tells you it's way different.

What this "stand his ground" business?

Viney was moving into to him. Viney wasn't standing still. He wasn't flying, but he lined him up. Unfortunately got his head.

Great effort to get the ball straight afterward. That was impressive. Kid can play.

 

[Daveismad]

So if your running with the flight of the ball to try and mark and in doing so turn side on and you clean someone up by your thinking that's a bump .....

Even if you marked it

........

I'm glad your not running the game

 

[tropicaltiger]

Not sure if you meant to quote me there. I've never played football full stop.

my apols, meant to hit like for yours but balls it up coz im still fuming.

 

[MeisterBot]

"AFL legal counsel Jeff Gleeson proposed Viney could have "spun out" of the impending collision, rather than bracing for contact."

So Viney should've squibbed it according to the AFL.

Geez.

 

[Bails2008]

I genuinely do not think he had another option but to brace for contact. The poor Fyfe decision a few months ago has created a poor precedence. The AFL seems obsessed about protecting people from injury at the expense of common sense and the fabric of what has made the game great. Injury is sometimes an unwanted consequence of contests and the physical nature of the sport.

I am filthy on the ruling regarding him "stepping on his left and spinning out of the way". That goes against everything that is great about AFL, everything we teach young kids playing the game and goes against the spirit of the game. If he had stepped aside he would have been criticised s from every angle of the media.

 

[RandB]

Rubbish comment. The age of the tribunal members has nothing to do with this decision.

Well this decision sure as heck doesn't seem to resonate with the majority of current or contemporary players who have publicly commented so far.

This decision isn't consistent with many previous decisions either except for a consistent notion of protecting the head. The application of this notion is getting more and more extreme hence the reaction.

Half a second between the ball bouncing and players making contact. To even treat this as a bump is ludicrous. Lynch would have been in possession of the footy for about 0.4 of a second or less. Viney lucky to even avoid front on collision.