Jack Viney

[BigMick1]

The reasons why Viney shouldn't have been suspended are well documented, for me the decision is embarrassing for a game in decline, fair dinkum what are the AFL trying to do to our great game, makes me sick in the guts that the do gooder minority prevail again. Hang your heads in shame AFL, seriously considering stepping right back for following this game I have loved since I was a young lad while this current crop of goons destroy it.

 

[Daveismad]

The game played at sped not in slow motion

When they showed it slowed down I'm thinking that is not what happened

I'm still shaking my head - why on earth can we give a bloke 2 weeks for thuggery like Mckernan did last year and 2 weeks for this ...beggars belief

The afl is concerned about concussion, when Greg Williams sated he was having serious problems from relate concussion is when the AFL's legal team went into a spin

They don't want a bunch of players suing the AFL for concussions and so on

And rightly so as we want the head protected from serious head trauma collisions. But there are going to be accidents and this is what I call an accident .....when all said and done it was unavoidable ...in fact I think Viney did a great job in actually minimising contact. You could argue the the crows player actually crashed into him ....he was stationary and that is the argument I would be leaning towards .....who crashed into who?

Viney may not have even seen his team mate tackling the crows player untill the last millisecond .....the game isn't played on a big fat sony 48 inch flat screen in slow motion ...it's played at hurtling speeds .....crashes will happen ..players cannot be robots and just choose the perfect option each time

We cannot have situation where players are being coached to think "how am I going to run around at break neck Speed while doing my best not to run into people and chase a ball that 35 other parole are chasing .....think about it for a second ..what on gods earth are we now supposed to say to 14-18 year old young men coming thru Tac and under age levels.....avoid contact ...don't brace ..

The laughable part was when the tribunal said he could have pirouetted out of the way ..this is football not some musical on 5th street with ballerinas prancing about ...this is played by men running at hurtling seed that weigh 90kg plus........omg they realise this?

If he had done a blind turn it's likely that would have cleaned up someone else .....you see this is what happens in a contact sport, people will crash into each other and accidents do happen

I'm going to be very cautious watching games in future because seriously if this is what the future looks like I want no part of it. None whatsoever!

I will watch ice hockey on fox instead of afl

 

[Daveismad]

The appeal should be very very simple to make in fact.

The Tribunal rules offer two circumstances under the Rough Conduct(High Bump) section, in which players will be found not guilty. One of these is:
"The player was contesting the ball and did not have a realistic alternative way to contest the ball;"

Gleeson made the AFL's case that Viney had a duty of care which required him to avoid the contest. There is no such requirement in the rules. The AFL made no attempt to suggest that tackling was a realistic alternative to contest the ball, they suggested the alternative was avoiding the contest altogether. If the tribunal ruled on the basis that Viney had a duty to avoid the contest in order to fulfil his duty of care they ruled incorrectly and it should be overturned.

If he had tried to tackle it would have been Viney with the busted jaw .....

 

[True Blue Saint]

I'm really baffled by these decisions. The only thing consistent about the MRP is the inconsistency.

What would happen in the event, where in the exact same passage of play, it was Lynch's shoulder that broke Viney's jaw? Does Lynch then get weeks?

And to take one step further, could you imagine if say, for example, Lenny Hayes lays a perfectly legal tackle on Steele Sidebottom, gets rewarded with a free kick, but upon impact with the ground, Steele dislocates his shoulder and has to miss 4 weeks. Does Lenny then get suspended? Is that where this game is headed?

It's meant to be a contact sport, and unfortunately, incidental injuries are a part and parcel of this sport.

 

[melbournemartin]

I will watch ice hockey on fox instead of afl

NHL Game Center. Get around it!

 

[Daveismad]

You see men when we first roamed the earth as cavemen we had to fight for food, we would go days on looking and it's what made us survive

Sport developed from the Romans and Greeks ...it was a contest and yes it was brutal at times

People survived .....some didn't

But our modern day gladiators are now being told, sorry thousands of years of learning must not be allowed to continue coz you might hurt someone

If you study history you'll se males have natural instinct to attack, this is how we survive in fact it's often how we minimise getting hurt ...

Now we are being told you must now stand there and not attack and hope like hell the ball somehow will just come to you ...he beast in the bush all those years ago didn't just come out and say ....here I'm ready for your spear......

This is crazy and goes against everything males are wired to do ..this working process has been going for thousands of years ......we just disconnect it and unwired it so simply

and frankly that's what the tribunal is asking males to do ...males that are sent out to battle in the cauldron while the peasants sit in the stands and yell and scream for a winner ....

Yet these modern gladiators are being told....no you can't do that anymore ......

It's killing your natural instincts ......

Just a different slant on it

 

[SBYM]

0. If he gets weeks for that I'll personally walk into afl house and swing haymakers

When is this happening?

 

[BG32]

When is this happening?

In 2 hours

 

[SBYM]

Good luck..chin Gil if you get a chance.

 

[kosifantutti]

This incident is almost identical to the one where Nick Riewoldt got a week after good record and early plea for breaking the jaw of an Adelaide player. Can't find any video. It was a bad decision then and it still is.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...on-for-high-bump/story-e6frexx0-1226104244849

 

[Demonheart]

The AFL is turning into a Bruise Free organization, but the most ridiculous thing that occurred was Gleeson's comment that Viney should have 'spun out' of the contest. This comment demonstrates that he has no understanding of not only how the game is played but what humans are physically capable of doing.

This decision is almost as bad as the AFL's ruling that no charges laid when Sylvia had his jaw broken in an off the contest incident against the Eagles a couple of years ago.

 

[Portmanteau]

If the AFLPA had any guts they'd organise for ruckmen to pirouette out of the first centre bounce in this week's games. Wouldn't affect the result of the game, but would put a message across.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

From the afl.com.au article:

"MELBOURNE midfielder Jack Viney will be sidelined for two matches after the Tribunal found him guilty of rough conduct in what was described as a landmark hearing on Tuesday night."

Wrong! The landmark decision was with Fyfe, followed by Douglas.

Only now that it has happened to a Vic club based player does the Vic centric media take note!

Completely different scenarios - Douglas bumped someone off the ball, Fyfe elected to bump when he could have tackled/smothered. Fyfe should not have been suspended and Douglas was borderline but this situation is completely different.

 

[Rankor]

I cant believe the tribunal found rough conduct in a rough sport.

Who would have though. I'm shocked.

I hope they review this stuff before next season because its becoming a joke that someone in a legitimate football collision can get games just because someone is unfortunate enough to get an injury.

Its really stupid that if the player got up and was not injured after a head clash that Viney would not have even be sighted.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Fyfe was punished. Douglas was punished. Viney was punished. Accept it, deal with it.

If you can't see the difference between the 3 incidents then you need to get rid of that eye-patch fella.

 

[Ted38]

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

That may be so but what it does show, beyond doubt, is that Viney is the third player to arrive at a three player contest where the other two are clearly contesting the ball and he is focussed solely on bumping the opposition player. He doesn't have his eyes on the ball at any stage and could've either avoided the collision or at least minimised it. The injury to the opposition player is indisputedly the result of his actions and that's why the tribunal found him guilty arguably aided by the frame by frame technology.

 

[PrideOf]

I really wish someone, anyone, with some clout would dig their heels in and have a wack at the AFL and the tribunal for allowing this to happen.

Not going to happen until it's a marquee player, from a marquee Melbourne-based club, it's Round 22 and he could miss a couple of finals.

So we're talking Swan, Pendlebury, Selwood or Hodge.

That's the only way this will be fixed.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Not going to happen until it's a marquee player, from a marquee Melbourne-based club, it's Round 22 and he could miss a couple of finals.

So we're talking Swan, Pendlebury, Selwood or Hodge.

That's the only way this will be fixed.

Really?

Chapman was suspended in the 2013 finals and missed the prelim. Crucial out. Shoulder bump, no injury.

 

[Wood_Duck]

I cant wait until there is a clash where both players get concussed and the AFL has to suspend both of them.

 

[cartwright]

I cant wait until there is a clash where both players get concussed and the AFL has to suspend both of them.

I'm curious as to what happens if Viney had hit Georgiou instead?
Suspend for an accidental hit on your own player?

 

[rumply]

I cant wait until there is a clash where both players get concussed and the AFL has to suspend both of them.

Someone raised a good point on radio yesterday about the collision between 2 Tigers players a few weeks ago where one went off concussed - why wasn't his teammate suspended??

Farking joke

 

[Ron The Bear]

Piss-poor act, closing the main board thread 'I won't be watching Friday night football this week'.

The game's in the palliative care of lawyers. As is their way, the corporates have taken something original and unique and synthesised it, wrapped it up in glitzy packaging and told you to like it. Well I've seen the real thing, and I'm not buying this shit.

In 38 years I've never simply not gone to watch Richmond, but I'm doing it in Round 9 - my personal insignificant token protest at the running of the game. As for Round 10 and beyond, I don't know.

 

[rumply]

I'm curious as to what happens if Viney had hit Georgiou instead?
Suspend for an accidental hit on your own player?

Or what if Viney had his jaw broken, would Tom Lynch have been suspended?

 

[rumply]

& why isnt this thread on the main board? This is not just a tribunal issue mods, Ant_,
Doss,Don Draper

 

[cartwright]

Piss-poor act, closing the main board thread 'I won't be watching Friday night football this week'.

The game's in the palliative care of lawyers. As is their way, the corporates have taken something original and unique and synthesised it, wrapped it up in glitzy packaging and told you to like it. Well I've seen the real thing, and I'm not buying this shit.

In 38 years I've never simply not gone to watch Richmond, but I'm doing it in Round 9 - my personal insignificant token protest at the running of the game. As for Round 10 and beyond, I don't know.

Don't know why that thread was closed.

Yes, players and fans should be voicing in a collective way. Lawyers do not own this game.

However, one or two, or 1000 people not turning up won't be noticed.