Geez things are bad! We must be the first AFL club that is putting its VFL affiliate position above its own.

What I hate about the Brown one is that it's rated as medium impact.

A boot to the face should not be regarded as medium impact - due to the possible consequences it should be rated as high impact immediately IMO, especially when the broken nose is considered!

  On 13/08/2013 at 08:02, Demonsterative said:

Geez things are bad! We must be the first AFL club that is putting its VFL affiliate position above its own.

Or you could look it as giving Clisby some taste of success rather than the beltings he'll probably see in the seniors over the coming weeks.

I get the point sue, not sure i like it. Things are bad when the club are preparing for Casey. But finals football would be good for Clisby.

Im disappointed that we didnt appeal. There is alot to be said for principle and values and if we want to build a strong culture then we cannot accept having players suspended on rubbish charges.

  On 13/08/2013 at 07:55, RalphiusMaximus said:

I do indeed. In this case I agree with you too.

There is indeed video footage on the club's website. It clearly shows that there was no injury at the time that the two players were pulled apart. I would say it is conclusive evidence that he is innocent. Hence my stance that it is [censored] weak of the club to back down and cough up a pathetic excuse that he might get to play a final assuming Casey are still afloat in four weeks which history suggests is highly unlikely.

ahh I see

I wasnt quite up to speed there ..lol

  On 13/08/2013 at 02:48, belzebub59 said:

I just dont think this club has the stomach for confrontation.. Its the 'rollover' Demons.

Sadly I see it that way too.

  On 13/08/2013 at 04:11, RalphiusMaximus said:

Oddly enough, if we challenge, he gets to play the last few games with us AND the VFL GF if we make it.

But if he is innocent then he should get to do both.

  On 13/08/2013 at 04:39, belzebub59 said:

A rudderless ship and no one manning the guns!!

  On 13/08/2013 at 07:55, RalphiusMaximus said:

I do indeed. In this case I agree with you too.

There is indeed video footage on the club's website. It clearly shows that there was no injury at the time that the two players were pulled apart. I would say it is conclusive evidence that he is innocent. Hence my stance that it is [censored] weak of the club to back down and cough up a pathetic excuse that he might get to play a final assuming Casey are still afloat in four weeks which history suggests is highly unlikely.

No leadership on or off the field. I am surprised that PJ hasn't turned that around...but it is a very poor prognostic sign that we will ever get G&D.

  On 13/08/2013 at 08:12, chookrat said:

Im disappointed that we didnt appeal. There is alot to be said for principle and values and if we want to build a strong culture then we cannot accept having players suspended on rubbish charges.

Agree 100%

Brown unsuccessful - 4 weeks.

Will miss the last games for his last contracted season.

  On 13/08/2013 at 08:35, PJ_12345 said:

Brown unsuccessful - 4 weeks.

Will miss the last games for his last contracted season.

I would not be disappointed if Campbell Brown's last ever game was against the Demons. If only we'd won...

He seems to think he'll play on.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-13/tribunal-outs-brown-for-four

Brown: "It's merely a technique we've been using,"

Wow, nice defense you dog Brown. I can't believe that kick was assessed as medium impact, it broke Strauss' nose FFS.

  On 13/08/2013 at 08:35, PJ_12345 said:

Brown unsuccessful - 4 weeks.

Will miss the last games for his last contracted season.

awwwwwwwwwwww

altogether...... poooooooorrrrr Brownie !!!

DOG !!!!!!

Weak, weak, weak. Weak on the field, weak off it. Just another small confirmation we will never be strong in any facet of this game.

No wonder all my friends laugh at the fact I support the dees.

Running out of inspiration to follow this insipid train wreck of a club. Can't even muster up the courage to fight the MRP now. Lol what joke we are!

  On 13/08/2013 at 09:31, Bring Back Bennell said:

Weak, weak, weak. Weak on the field, weak off it. Just another small confirmation we will never be strong in any facet of this game.

No wonder all my friends laugh at the fact I support the dees.

Running out of inspiration to follow this insipid train wreck of a club. Can't even muster up the courage to fight the MRP now. Lol what joke we are!

its hard to counter this... sad as that is

I'm putting it out there for someone to counter and help restore my faith. Anyone?

  On 13/08/2013 at 09:46, Bring Back Bennell said:

I'm putting it out there for someone to counter and help restore my faith. Anyone?

Nope I'm with you. I even had an exchange with whoever (Burgan?) runs the club twitter about it being weak but they seem to think Clisby was the one who made the decision and placed eligibility for VFL finals over 3 AFL matches which says it all really.

As for the incident itself it doesn't even feature in the MRP video on AFL.com. It may well be that they missed it originally but got a please explain from the holier than thou Gold Cost about how their player injured himself.

That combined with the media and Geischam both coming out and saying Ablett was scragged to death is laughable. Aaron Davey in 2008-2010 got 100 times the attention Garland and McKenzie gave Ablett that was almost entirely above board with a bit of body touch on around the contest but very little actual holding, grabbing or sniping.

  On 13/08/2013 at 09:54, the master said:

Nope I'm with you. I even had an exchange with whoever (Burgan?) runs the club twitter about it being weak but they seem to think Clisby was the one who made the decision and placed eligibility for VFL finals over 3 AFL matches which says it all really.

How does not contesting it add up to increased eligibility for VFL finals? If his case was strong then a zero match suspension would beat a three match suspension. I come back to the point that Clisby and/or the club must not believe they had a strong case. At face value it just looks like the young man made a poor decision.

Oh well, at least justice was served for Brown. That makes me feel a bit better.

  On 13/08/2013 at 10:03, Nasher said:

How does not contesting it add up to increased eligibility for VFL finals? If his case was strong then a zero match suspension would beat a three match suspension. I come back to the point that Clisby and/or the club must not believe they had a strong case. At face value it just looks like the young man made a poor decision.

Oh well, at least justice was served for Brown. That makes me feel a bit better.

Casey will finish top 4. Missing 3 weeks means he misses last 2 rounds of VFL and then the first final which is a qualifying final. Then he'd make it back for the first knock out final.

Challenge and lose and he misses 4 weeks and therefore misses that knock out final.

Of course the strength of case came into it. If they thought it was a certainty to get off they would still challenge. But there is no certainty to the tribunal.

In some ways it's a great display of loyalty that a guy with what 5 AFL games is willing to give up a decent shot at 3 more to end the year in order to be available for VFL finals. In a lot of ways that hopefully signifies a cultural change in the playing group even though the footy department staff have yet to learn they need to be ruthless as well.

The laughable thing is that Clisby's tackle (even if it did cause the injury) is off so much less force than the sling Cyril Rioli got away with. The reliance on injuries to determine not on the length of suspension but whether a player is suspended is a joke.

Why didn't they plead guilty but challenge the severe rating?

I thought that was a loop hole that was allowed? He could have pleased guilty then claimed it was low impact given he wasn't injured until after the incident.

  On 13/08/2013 at 09:31, Bring Back Bennell said:

Weak, weak, weak. Weak on the field, weak off it. Just another small confirmation we will never be strong in any facet of this game.

No wonder all my friends laugh at the fact I support the dees.

Running out of inspiration to follow this insipid train wreck of a club. Can't even muster up the courage to fight the MRP now. Lol what joke we are!

Have to agree. We need to be strong on field and OFF FIELD PJ!!! The video indicates this charge is rubbish. There is nothing there at all. The MRP talks about an investigation which I suspect is no more than a review of the GCS medical report. Oh popped shoulder, high impact, must be someone's fault. Again video shows a melee and wrestle. We should have taken this to the tribunal if only to work out the logic of the charge. This is a kid with no priors getting the same time as CB kicking Strauss in the head and who has years of form for all the wrong reasons.

Get some G and D MFC!!!

fmd No one can convince me Casey would live or die over Clisby.

MFC weak as

For me this has very little to do with Clisby and everything to do with MFC yet AGAIN copping it sweet without fighting it out.

Like we always have, and it appears always will, we make it easy to be the bullied because we never stand up for ourselves when wronged. If we didn't fight this because we are suckjng on the AFL'S teet-which I don't buy - then as of right now we are dead.

I'm going to have to start not hating every other team in the comp because it is becoming very conceivable to me now that one day I might actually have to follow one of the pricks

  On 13/08/2013 at 11:44, Bring Back Bennell said:

For me this has very little to do with Clisby and everything to do with MFC yet AGAIN copping it sweet without fighting it out.

Like we always have, and it appears always will, we make it easy to be the bullied because we never stand up for ourselves when wronged. If we didn't fight this because we are suckjng on the AFL'S teet-which I don't buy - then as of right now we are dead.

I'm going to have to start not hating every other team in the comp because it is becoming very conceivable to me now that one day I might actually have to follow one of the pricks

I suppose the club's survey may be the place to start. Let them know your thoughts.

Why should we stand fast if the club's management repeatedly rolls over. In this case the evidence looks flakey but if MFC has some other evidence should not they let us know so we understand their decision making?

  On 13/08/2013 at 11:44, Bring Back Bennell said:

For me this has very little to do with Clisby and everything to do with MFC yet AGAIN copping it sweet without fighting it out.

Like we always have, and it appears always will, we make it easy to be the bullied because we never stand up for ourselves when wronged. If we didn't fight this because we are suckjng on the AFL'S teet-which I don't buy - then as of right now we are dead.

I'm going to have to start not hating every other team in the comp because it is becoming very conceivable to me now that one day I might actually have to follow one of the pricks

You caught the bit where it was Clisby's decision didn't you?

  On 13/08/2013 at 11:44, Bring Back Bennell said:

For me this has very little to do with Clisby and everything to do with MFC yet AGAIN copping it sweet without fighting it out.Like we always have, and it appears always will, we make it easy to be the bullied because we never stand up for ourselves when wronged. If we didn't fight this because we are suckjng on the AFL'S teet-which I don't buy - then as of right now we are dead.I'm going to have to start not hating every other team in the comp because it is becoming very conceivable to me now that one day I might actually have to follow one of the pricks

I'm not saying Essendon is a club to support if the MFC falls over, but the fight they are currently taking to the AFL is admirable. I'm not suggesting they are in the right in any way either. But they are what MFC isn't in many ways. Most importantly the fight they are prepared face. It seems both on and off field