Kennedy got off without being charged for the sylvia incident. Find that a little strange after the melbourne football department made a bit of a statement about it. How can a player get a broken jaw from a shepard and the contact be deemed ok?

Kennedy not cited

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/demons-want-action-on-colin-sylvia-bump/story-e6frf9io-1225840959580

guess the camera was not sighted also

Had been grinter not kennedy it would have been 8 weeks

how could he be actively involved in play if he was metres of the ball?

I think the issue with the camera is correct. No evidence. Without it you are only speculating on what you think happened. Unfortunate.

Grinter did his brain fade in front of the camera. If he did it today, he would probably get a year for it.

really good to read that article again.

Everybody should re-read that article. Expectations began to get over the top preseason. We are what we are at the moment. But we all know what is coming.

I think the issue with the camera is correct. No evidence. Without it you are only speculating on what you think happened. Unfortunate.

I thought someone said they saw the incident shown on TV. Was their film or not?

The wheel always turns.

The AFL are all about protecting the head

Whether accidental or not the only conclusion i can make is Sylvia was tackled illegally

You dont get a broken jaw from a legal sheppard

Imagine the media frenzy if it was Ablett , Franklin or Judd

Jake King gets three weeks with no evidence except Travis Cloke's word, How the F*#k does this work ??

THis probably isn't massively interesting but I know for a fact that Col also lost two teeth as a result of the bump. Man I would love to see the footage and see how it is deemed as acceptable contact.

who said the bump is dead

Pretty disappointing result with Kennedy considering the severity of Sylvia's injury

AFL changes it's rules again.

I think we are the only sport where the rules change every year if not month.

Last year Kennedy would have got weeks for that after the Maxwell incident.

I thought the head wa sa no go area, can't be a fair bump if it hit Sylvia in the head.

AFL hasn't changed the rules, there is no footage or evidence that the bump was high besides the injuries....

If there was footage or a photo (like the cloke incident) they would of rubbed him out for four weeks...

Look at the explanation by the AFL it is all about charging nothing about head high contact... why everyone isn't looking they put it to the bottom of the pile

AFL hasn't changed the rules, there is no footage or evidence that the bump was high besides the injuries....

If there was footage or a photo (like the cloke incident) they would of rubbed him out for four weeks...

Look at the explanation by the AFL it is all about charging nothing about head high contact... why everyone isn't looking they put it to the bottom of the pile

This "No Footage" arguement is just absolute Garbage, & once again the AFL is spineless when it suits.

For close on 100 years there was minimal camera footage at all VFL grounds -occasionally a bit of slo mo film was seen on world of sport on a sunday morning.

If the AFL wanted to act, they would listen to evidence like any court.

But sadly Colin Sylvia is not high profile enough (yet) Makes me sick, if Gary Ablett had been snotted a full Royal commission would be in session right now.

Spot on Why you little.

We played them last season remember - what goes around comes around. First Sylvia does the hitting, then Sylvia is hit. What happens next will make for interesting viewing.

We played them last season remember - what goes around comes around. First Sylvia does the hitting, then Sylvia is hit. What happens next will make for interesting viewing.

That is not the way to run a League, and i doubt it is the AFL's thinking anyway.

It's all about Player Profile, & the MFC should fight this one, Nobody has a worse injury list than us right now & i hope the club makes a stand.

What a debacle....for an entire season all we heard was "it is the player's responsibility to ensure they do not make contact with the head"

Now it seems if you are anywhere near the play and a bump can be expected it won't matter how high it lands

Fraser is off to a cracking start as head of the Match review Panel

What a crock

This is the AFL tribunal at its typical worst - utter inconsistency.

There is only one answer - Kennedy does not walk off the MCG come 5pm May 15.

Ironed out by The Russian would be my choice. Johnson in full flight could do it also. As could Joel Mac. Beamer likewise. Oh the possibilities!

I thought someone said they saw the incident shown on TV. Was their film or not?

Apparently we submitted footage of the incident to the Pigs at the MRP,

but they came up with all manner of excuses for a bloke whos had a 'blinder of a pre-season'-(perth 10 news) and who will undoubtedly bring people through the gates here in Perth.. (Make sense now?)

EG: They, amongst other BS, claimed "Slyvia was in the contest and should've expected hard contact" (or words to that effect) and qualified it by stating, 'there was no contact with the elbow.'

Right, so this year, if in a contest and in a position where its resonable to expect contact - its OK to expect it in the f*cking face?

Nev Jetta floored a freo fool over here in game one a few weeks ago. Hip and shouldered him in the chest and still got pinged.

The MRP and substandard umpiring are so unbelievably incompetent, headed by the biggest mistake this game has ever seen to date - A. Demetriou.

Its (he is) destroying the game and it seems to me that the incompetence and inconsistencies are geared toward a system where the umpires will find easier and easier to control the outcome of a game.

EG: the petty irregular 'hands in the back' crap which can easily take away or give a team an important shot at goal..

Sometimes I wonder how long people will stand for it!

Vlad is more worried about talking to Lara Bingle than he is in looking after his own players!! I am furious on this one.

Full cameras have only been at grounds for about 10 years. The Tribunal has been around way longer than that...i need a whiskey shot...

Generally speaking, you cannot blame "external circumstances" on collision injuries, except in the case of Sylvia, who in my view was unfairly taken out. Hopefully the match review panel see it this way as well.

However, it seems to me, that "unsuccessful" clubs - that is, in terms of on field results - always seem to get more than their fair share of serious injuries. It is like a downward spiral, where the more your on field performances wane, the more unlucky you seem to become with injury. Of course this can be put down to young bodies not being able to adjust to the speed and physicality of the game at the highest level and inexperience also contributes.

But I still wonder, if confidence is low, does natural footy instinct diminish as a result? Do naturally gifted players begin to doubt themselves and therefore 2nd guess what they would otherwise do as a matter of instinct? With confidence at a low ebb, do players lose their sense of what is around them and lack confidence in teammates, so that a player in possession does not take the first option? Where a playing group does not have a winning mentality, do they forget how to make space and where they should run to? Does the team plan simply go out the window? If this has some credibility, then does such a "curse" become contagious within the entire playing group. If this does have any substance, then I wonder how it has come about, and what is being done about it.

I am not presenting these scenarios as a matter of fact, I simply pose them as questions to ponder,

my opinion is that the differences between 'most' afl lists is so insignificant that it can come down to little things like great runs with injuries to determine who finishes up the top. obviously we have an exception with our current list, but in general it is often those other factors that make the difference.

Chris Connelly was on SEN (forgive me if it were another station as I was listening from the back seat of a car) tonight discussing the whole Sylvia incident. Melbourne wll not contest the descision however said the umpires have now set the precedence for the rest of the year. Meaning if one of our players hit a player in a 'contest' and broke their jaw, then they should also get off on charges, suspensions etc.

Was also mentioned that no Melbourne player went in to help Col, which I personally find weak and disgraceful. No matter whether it was a legal bump or not, a bump which leaves your teamate floored should be enough for you to get stuck in. By this i dont mean punches and bodyslams, but at least show some passion and back eachother up. And no it's not in-experience and young age, as the players that should be in there pushing and shoving are seniors such as our captain, jones, moloney etc.

The final point CC made was in regards to Newton. He said that there were many ahead of him in the pecking order regardless of injuries, and that he must take this chance to become the footballer he wants to become. Said he would be given a chance at Casey, and must prove to them that he can handle the big time. Also said that Gawn and Tapscott are both on the long term injury list, therefor at one point during the next few weeks we're likely to see a rookie or two elevated from that list and into the seniors.

Thats all the info i can remember from the interview at this stage, sorry folks. My dad was in my ear about how weak Melb were for not disputing the col bump. So was hard to balance the both

who said the bump is dead

You have a point. So, the head is no longer sacrosanct.

We played them last season remember - what goes around comes around. First Sylvia does the hitting, then Sylvia is hit. What happens next will make for interesting viewing.

Difference is Selwood was not hurt enough to miss games and Sylvia got 3 weeks.

Everybody should re-read that article. Expectations began to get over the top preseason. We are what we are at the moment. But we all know what is coming.

Yes that is a great article I love the ending best of all where Martin Flanagan writes

"In a couple of years, Melbourne could have an attack that includes Watts, Jurrah, Jamie Bennell, Neville Jetta, Austin Wonaeamirri, Aaron Davey and Grimes.

I reckon that's as much as Rocket Eade, one of the most creative coaches of recent times, had when he took over the Dogs. If I were a Melbourne fan, I'd stick around. But, for the moment, the heat is on."

Now that's exciting

Chris Connelly was on SEN (forgive me if it were another station as I was listening from the back seat of a car) tonight discussing the whole Sylvia incident. Melbourne wll not contest the descision however said the umpires have now set the precedence for the rest of the year. Meaning if one of our players hit a player in a 'contest' and broke their jaw, then they should also get off on charges, suspensions etc.

Apropos......

Melbourne Demons say Josh Kennedy decision sets precedent for season