They should have suspended him from round 12.

It's BECAUSE it's 4 months away that it's going to hurt that much more. He has to carry it for the whole pre-season - and during that period, isn't going to forget it for a single day.

Penalty matches the crime - though a period training away from the players could have been thrown in for good measure. He's had his chances. Pretty devastating to see IMHO, especially with the new regime, and Beamer's call to him at the Bluey presentation.

That's one way of looking at it. I'm fine with suspending players because of poor off-field behaviour. I just wonder if the length of time until he has to serve his one-match ban might make the penalty less effective. I would prefer some sort of modified training schedule (away from the rest of his team-mates) or something which has a more immediate effect. If he had done the same thing on the Monday morning after Round 1, for example, banning him for Round 2 (and perhaps longer) would be the obvious punishment. But the fact that we can't do that now means that I think a different penalty would have been more effective.

But you raise a good point. Maybe he will think about it every day until then, making the punishment more effective. However, I doubt Sylvia will think of it that way. He strikes me as a more "immediate" kind of guy.

Jordie-Tackles' point about the fact that it affects the team making it a more severe punishment is also quite true, and something I didn't think about until he brought it up.

Jordie-Tackles' point about the fact that it affects the team making it a more severe punishment is also quite true, and something I didn't think about until he brought it up.

This reasoning would mean that you can never be suspended from a game because it affects your team.

He let down his club and his teammates and he will be reminded of that fact on the Thursday before the Brisbane game when he is selected for Casey. The MFC isn't punishing the team, Colin Sylvia is.

This reasoning would mean that you can never be suspended from a game because it affects your team.

He let down his club and his teammates and he will be reminded of that fact on the Thursday before the Brisbane game when he is selected for Casey. The MFC isn't punishing the team, Colin Sylvia is.

It's not like suspending him was the club's only option. The team is considerably weakened by Sylvia's absence and if we were to lose the game by under a goal, that loss would be on the MFC (not Colin) as far as I'm concerned.

Why not just give him a big fine instead? Tripling the $5k fine perhaps? The only thing he did wrong was not immediately telling the club what had happened.

The effect this punishment will have on Sylvia is debatable but the effect it will have on putting our best team on the park in round 1 is undeniable.

Why not just give him a big fine instead? Tripling the $5k fine perhaps?

Yes , I thought of this as well but on checking found that 5k is the maximum fine that can be imposed ( CBA )

Stand to be corrected though .

It's not like suspending him was the club's only option. The team is considerably weakened by Sylvia's absence and if we were to lose the game by under a goal, that loss would be on the MFC (not Colin) as far as I'm concerned.

Short-term pain for long-term gain. It's not just a message to Sylvia; it's a message to the entire playing group.

Why not just give him a big fine instead? Tripling the $5k fine perhaps?

The size of the fine is limited afaik.

The only thing he did wrong was not immediately telling the club what had happened.

No (at least, not according to the Club).

Yes , I thought of this as well but on checking found that 5k is the maximum fine that can be imposed ( CBA )

Stand to be corrected though .

Wouldn't there be ways around it? Like $5k to the club, $10k to a nominated charity?

Wouldn't there be ways around it? Like $5k to the club, $10k to a nominated charity?

Yeah , good point , if you could get the player to agree to it . Fair solution that one "Deez" .

Btw - you'd have to think that Colin is going to be out of pocket a fair bit re the whole accident .

This reasoning would mean that you can never be suspended from a game because it affects your team.

He let down his club and his teammates and he will be reminded of that fact on the Thursday before the Brisbane game when he is selected for Casey. The MFC isn't punishing the team, Colin Sylvia is.

He let his team down by missing round 1 if you followed the flow, exactly the opposite to how you read it,

Team mates wont appreciate this and expect him to act in ways which are professional ect, not miss future games and possibly put in extra effort to make up the difference in effort for the game he misses

The only thing he did wrong was not immediately telling the club what had happened.

I for one, have a a bit of a problem reconciling the constant call round here for the players to be harder and more professional in the way they play and prepare, yet when someone goes and does exactly the opposite, it's somehow acceptable or minimised. Toughness isn't about biffing players behind the ball, then boasting about it to your mates over a beer or three.

Edited October 30, 201113 yr by bing181

He has to punished and in a meaningful and gut wrenching way. It needs to permeate his thick skull that the way hes going about things is simply wrong and wrong wont be tolerated , not an inch.

Its a bit like making the whole platoon do pushups because pone has let teh side down. I.e one person not acting in unison with the team brings about its pain.

Totally agree with the sentiments that is ok to talk the talk about hardening up but come walking the walk many want to go all gooey.

Colin needs to harden up a lot, and some supporters could do with doing so a bit too.

Having the coach say in passing "I hope this won't be used as an excuse for another poor season. This isn't going to effect your performance right?" could be enough of a response if the aim was to get CS to train/play hard. But from an external standpoint, it would seem like there is no repurcussions to his actions. Personally, the coach saying this would burn a very long and hot fire in my gut all season.

Short-term pain for long-term gain. It's not just a message to Sylvia; it's a message to the entire playing group.

Not a strong enough message as far as I'm concerned.

It's not like suspending him was the club's only option. The team is considerably weakened by Sylvia's absence and if we were to lose the game by under a goal, that loss would be on the MFC (not Colin) as far as I'm concerned.

Why not just give him a big fine instead? Tripling the $5k fine perhaps? The only thing he did wrong was not immediately telling the club what had happened.

The effect this punishment will have on Sylvia is debatable but the effect it will have on putting our best team on the park in round 1 is undeniable.

There needs to be a statement, but it needs to really hit home.

A one match suspension and $5K fine is water off a ducks back. And anyone who thinks a summer of reflection in the meantime for Colin will be a telling effect and turn him around are clutching at straws.

As posted above, the comparitive penalty with Stevie J from much admired LG and those in power at GFC really hit the mark for a serial offender in Johnson. Why not take a leaf out of the book from the best ?

I would have been inclined to whack him with a 5 match suspension and have him undertake a 50 hour road trauma education. Regardless of him being the 'passenger'.

This would have far greater effect for player and club as a whole. I'm not concerned by Sylvia's absence in this case. It's the greater picture which is far more important.

If we lose by a goal against Brisbane it is on the head of the bloke who was keen to play in a game he clearly had no interest being professional when in preparation for said game.

When will he learn?

I don't know.

But I know for certain that the youngsters that will supposedly break our flag drought need to reminded of what is expected and that those that have not lived up to our ethos will be called to account.

A position in the team for the 1st game of the 2012 season has become available...... who wants it?

Do i dare be so cyncial and suggest he ( CS) wouldnt have been quite so silly hadnt his contract been signed yet ??

This is the sort of element that gets up my goat, some of these geese play the club for fools really. As soon as they think theyre safe and sound the real nature of the beast shows its head again.

How long did he sign for ? How much value do we want/need to extract ffrom him ? If we are to get anything of use he has to be censured big time. Apparently Colin doesnt understand subtlety so in that light take a sledge hammer to him. Fine by me.

Others have seen the light as to what the club is doing . Its not just a message to Colin its a 'take note people' cross the line and we will smack you , HARD .

You would like to think that you could deal with some /all as respectful adults but a few , theres always a few, spoil it and they need to be treated like 5yo's.

Now its up to Sylvia to show some mettle. Dont be mislead. This is ultimately his doing and he needs to fix it.

With some players that could be the case in question.

I think this is more a situation where Col was just being.......Col.

Do i dare be so cyncial and suggest he ( CS) wouldnt have been quite so silly hadnt his contract been signed yet ??

This is the sort of element that gets up my goat, some of these geese play the club for fools really. As soon as they think theyre safe and sound the real nature of the beast shows its head again.

That's some seriously tinfoil hat stuff there BB. I prefer the more simple explanation that Colin Sylvia makes dumb decisions because he has poor judgement. The contract timing is about as relevant as the weather on the day or what undies he was wearing at the time.

Others have seen the light as to what the club is doing . Its not just a message to Colin its a 'take note people' cross the line and we will smack you , HARD .

If you, Colin Sylvia, any Melbourne supporter, member, official or importantly 'player' think that penalty is considered "HARD" enough, they don't know what ruthless is. It also questions the manner and intent on going about changing one's culture.

Stevie J and the Geelong Football Club would be shaking their head at Melbournefc's "stand" on this. Then again, they wouldn't be all that surprised either that it's Melbourne.

Melbournefc and particularly Mark Neeld, had a chance to make a decisive and significant stance on this sort of serial offender. And I believe they've missed their mark with the penalty on Colin Sylvia - a serial offender, big time.

The 'take note people' of crossing the line for serial offenders is a one match suspension and $5k fine. Not enough in my book, far from it. And the players will think that breaking team rules and going outside the boundaries where it is frowned upon, won't result in that bigger penalty.

Put simply, the club is not tough enough.

If you, Colin Sylvia, any Melbourne supporter, member, official or importantly 'player' think that penalty is considered "HARD" enough, they don't know what ruthless is. It also questions the manner and intent on going about changing one's culture.

Stevie J and the Geelong Football Club would be shaking their head at Melbournefc's "stand" on this. Then again, they wouldn't be all that surprised either that it's Melbourne.

Melbournefc and particularly Mark Neeld, had a chance to make a decisive and significant stance on this sort of serial offender. And I believe they've missed their mark with the penalty on Colin Sylvia - a serial offender, big time.

The 'take note people' of crossing the line for serial offenders is a one match suspension and $5k fine. Not enough in my book, far from it. And the players will think that breaking team rules and going outside the boundaries where it is frowned upon, won't result in that bigger penalty.

Put simply, the club is not tough enough.

Too much hyperbole for me H_T.

Just remember too that it is simplistic to think that there is a a 'one-size-fits-all' remedy to behaviour modification

I wonder whether some of the acrimony and calling for even more punishment is not tainted by things other than off-field misbehaviour such as Colin not living upto some posters expectations with his on-field performances.

I wonder whether some of the acrimony and calling for even more punishment is not tainted by things other than off-field misbehaviour such as Colin not living upto some posters expectations with his on-field performances.

You don't think there could be some correlation there? Attitude can cut across all areas of an individual's life.

You don't think there could be some correlation there? Attitude can cut across all areas of an individual's life.

Why do you think I would bring it up if I didn't think there could be some correlation there? Shees!

The punishment should be related to the offense (and any priors) and not tainted by other subjective emotions.

On-field performance issues are tackled by training, coaching and selection regimes.

This kind of stuff is ridiculous. Sylvia is employed to help us win games of football. Not sure what this incident has to do with winning games of football, particularly in 2012

Why do you think I would bring it up if I didn't think there could be some correlation there? Shees!

The punishment should be related to the offense (and any priors) and not tainted by other subjective emotions.

On-field performance issues are tackled by training, coaching and selection regimes.

I am saying that the correlation relates to his off-field misdemeanours and his on-field performances - in essence, Col's attitude in general sucks and by hitting him hard as a result of his actions, it may hopefully result in a big change in his attitude when it comes to his on-field performances as well as his off-field performances - in other words, posters' views of what constitutes fair punishment is not necessarily being tainted by his on-field performances.

I am saying that the correlation relates to his off-field misdemeanours and his on-field performances - in essence, Col's attitude in general sucks and by hitting him hard as a result of his actions, it may hopefully result in a big change in his attitude when it comes to his on-field performances as well as his off-field performances - in other words, posters' views of what constitutes fair punishment is not necessarily being tainted by his on-field performances.

So, are you seriously suggesting we should start fining players whose on-field performances and perceived on-field attitudes don't meet expectations. There would be a lot of players being fined based on 2011 performances. I don't think you really meant that, so similarly Sylvia shouldn't have these factors included in his punishment for his current misbehaviour. However, I would agree that if the punishment does have an effect on his attitude this could consequently well have a positive effect on his on-field performance.

Can't you see that off-field misdemeanors and on-field perceived attitude/performance are handled by different and separate mechanisms even though one could incidentally impact the other?