I'm worried about the first time someone punches Jack Viney in the face... The damage that JV's face does to the other guys fist is going to be classified as High Impact and he'll get a few weeks...

I'm worried about the first time someone punches Jack Viney in the face... The damage that JV's face does to the other guys fist is going to be classified as High Impact and he'll get a few weeks...

That has already happened, broken jaw and all....and Wojinski got in effect two weeks!

So inconsistent the MPR....a patheitc joke

That has already happened, broken jaw and all....and Wojinski got in effect two weeks!

So inconsistent the MPR....a patheitc joke

I had forgotten about that...

Spencer was actually stationary when McEvoy hit him. Thats the line I would take.

Looked ugly (liked most of spencers actions) and if it was Collingwood he would get off. BUt as its Melbourne 3 weeks.

Thats because you paused it....

The MRP couldn't find its arse with both hands and a torch.

like trying to climb out of a spider hole

If Hodgey can get them down, we should fly the flag.

A knee drop gets 1 week and a king hit 2 - the MRP out did itself this week.

Chris Dawes should threaten to lay charges against Simpkin.

If I were Dawes, I'd throw the idea up to the media of laying charges.

Just to draw attention to the MRP lenient suspension.

Chris Dawes should threaten to lay charges against Simpkin.

If I were Dawes, I'd throw the idea up to the media of laying charges.

Just to draw attention to the MRP lenient suspension.

It was assessed low impact - effectively saying Dawes milked it

It was assessed low impact - effectively saying Dawes milked it

I would've preferred seeing Dawes grin and shove Simpkin to the ground rather than the delayed fall to the ground.

Toughen up Dawesy and don't let that happen again.

that was his first decent game. up until now its been face in palms material.

It was an excellent game. I think he is very promising. I would also take the matter to the tribunal

Chris Dawes should threaten to lay charges against Simpkin.

If I were Dawes, I'd throw the idea up to the media of laying charges.

Just to draw attention to the MRP lenient suspension.

Chris Dawes would make a complaint, the Police lay charges...and simply just a silly idea anyway. I do however understand and respect your frustration at the MRP.

You think the MRP is biased against Melbourne? Or deliberately sets out to ensure our players get screwed?

That just doesn't happen.

The MRP is just an inconsistent mess.

I don't think it's bias so much as a soft target. They tend to avoid hitting players from the big clubs with harsh penlties because they know that those clubs will fight back hard and have the clout to do so. They see the same act by a Melbourne player and have no hesitation in slugging them with a huge penalty because there is a perception that we will not make much of a fuss and lack the clout in terms of media personalities and power-brokers to make anything of it. Do you believe that a Collingwood player would have been given three weeks for a tackle like Trengove was? Eddie would have crucified them on radio and TV, and his friends would have joined in. Likewise, when Beamer was given two games for high contact when the replay clearly showed that he failed to connect with the player at all. Jack Ziebell from the Roos is another. Then there is the traditional injury to Sylvia in the pre-season that is never cited. This is simply another example. It's easy for the MRP and the tribunal to show the world that they are taking a stand against high contact by being overly harsh on a player from a weak club, and it buys them a little more room to avoid doing it to someone from a club that might be able to fight back.

What I want to see from the club is the willingness to not just appeal an overly harsh call, but to make NOISE about it. This is one reason I want a more prominent president. We need to be able to make a hell of a lot of noise about issues so that they can't be discretely ignored by the AFL. We need leaders at the club who will fight over every issue and raise hell if the AFL even try to ignore them. This is one (but only one) of the reasons I liked the idea of Jeff being involved with the board. He has a massive public profile and when he speaks people listen.

This is not right. Punching on the the side of the head/neck is a dog act. 4 weeks

Spencer 2

This is not right. Punching on the the side of the head/neck is a dog act. 4 weeks

Spencer 2

Robbo agrees with you.

Absolutely. [censored]. Ridiculous.

Edit: spelled both absolutely and [censored] wrong. Bed time.

Edited June 24, 201312 yr by Undeeterred

This ruling is complete garbage and highlights how pathetic the MRP has become. I hope the MFC contest spencers charge!

simpkin should have a 4 week holiday and spencer should only get 2. But as usual the MRP get it A$$ about yet again

no real point to challenge it, although i think the ruling is a crap one, i think it is much similar to the trengove sling tackle and the afl wanting to make a stand on it.

our challenge would be against the severity of the incident, mcevoy didnt play for the rest of the game, so severity was quite high.
or about what else he could have done, when he decided to not go for the football he lost his leg to stand on.

is it as bad as punching a bloke no, but at the end of the day i dont think challenging will be able to get spence off, but rather he will be looking at 4 weeks

no real point to challenge it, although i think the ruling is a crap one, i think it is much similar to the trengove sling tackle and the afl wanting to make a stand on it.

our challenge would be against the severity of the incident, mcevoy didnt play for the rest of the game, so severity was quite high.

or about what else he could have done, when he decided to not go for the football he lost his leg to stand on.

is it as bad as punching a bloke no, but at the end of the day i dont think challenging will be able to get spence off, but rather he will be looking at 4 weeks

I'd take the line that it was unavoidable and not a bump. Random injuries sometimes happen in a contact sport, and that's exactly what it was, two unco big men who ran into each other.

What i find difficult to understand is the blow to Dawes was deemed low impact

yet it caused a big guy like Dawes to go to ground and from what i saw in a dazed state

If it was low impact then Dawes should have been charged for acting ?

bewildering decision

What i find difficult to understand is the blow to Dawes was deemed low impact

yet it caused a big guy like Dawes to go to ground and from what i saw in a dazed state

If it was low impact then Dawes should have been charged for acting ?

bewildering decision

Surprised they didn't. Mandatory two weeks, and it would make them look all tough and serious and stuff.

I'd take the line that it was unavoidable and not a bump. Random injuries sometimes happen in a contact sport, and that's exactly what it was, two unco big men who ran into each other.

i would agree with that, but as they said on the review show, he chose to not go for the ball and there was no circumstances out of his control other that the fact he is a little bit uncoordinated.

he shouldnt get 3 weeks considering some of the other hits that have caused injury and although unintentional those kind of bumps are the dangerous ones, but i doubt we can get muchchanged with the appeal.

I personally dont understand the mrp, but if we did appeal what would we be looking to change (other than weeks reported)? is there a classification that could well lower the weeks

Only skimmed this thread but anything about Watts' dive? If Dawes got two weeks for acting Watts wouldn't be playing another game this year.

The MRP is a joke. While I do agree that Spencer deserves a suspension (more for being careless than malicious), and that Dawes did milk Simpkin's "king hit" for all it was worth, there is no way that the former act was worse than the latter.

I'd take the line that it was unavoidable and not a bump. Random injuries sometimes happen in a contact sport, and that's exactly what it was, two unco big men who ran into each other.

i seem to recall Fletcher's defense of an elbow he gave was "its just the way i run"

What i find difficult to understand is the blow to Dawes was deemed low impact

yet it caused a big guy like Dawes to go to ground and from what i saw in a dazed state

If it was low impact then Dawes should have been charged for acting ?

bewildering decision

Absolutely! If that was acting, Dawes has missed his calling. He should be on the big screen, and raking in the mega bucks!

There is no way that was acting! And, the way he went down, there is no way it was "low impact". I'd like the twits on the MRP to be on the receiving end of that punch, and then describe it as "low impact"! That mob has definitely lost the plot!