I think that is what Jack's defence will put forward.^^

I took a whole bunch of screen grabs of the incident.

1. 11:15 on clock. Ball is loose and bouncing, equal distance to Viney and Lynch (about 5 meters to each), but moving towards Lynch. A true 50:50 contest
2. 11:15 on clock. Ball about to bounce for the last time, now closer to Lynch. Ball accelerates towards Lynch after this bounce.
3. 11:15 on clock. Ball at Lynch (not in possession though). Viney about 2-3 meters away, turning towards the ball (on Lynchs right side/hip).
4. 11:14 on clock. Collision occurs.
5. 11:14 on clock. Players all on the ground.
6. 11:13 on clock. Viney on his feet, ball in hands about to run away from the contest.

Can anyone truly say that Viney made a decision to bump?

And if so, why did he slow down considerably, shedding nearly all his momentum and not push off into the bump?

Must get off.

Abraham Zapruder took an 8mm film of it as well.

We need as a side-show to accidentally add Long-on-Simmonds into our bag of reference points. Old precident, but the 70 year old tweed-wearing lawyer wants the lot.

I also read that we can replace Viney with Clisby. In current footy speak, you lose a player, and another "warrior" comes up and plays the role. Well this guy is your Ben Hur Sparticus General-before-during-War whatever. Sorry, "you can never replace Jack Viney". I assume that no coach at Ashy, Echuca, Adelaide, Casey, nor Melbourne has/will ever truly think it. Guts, enthusiasm, will, thrives on contested footy and takes em on when he gets it..

The outcome of Grimes and Trenners (my original choice anyway) cost this guy 3 years. Would have been Captain at 22/23 surely. Some guys (not many) wake up for the biggest challenge that life can throw at em. This kid is a one-in-a-generation MFC footballer. Better stronger actions than Marc Murphy, and doesn't look like a rabbit in headlights when speaking either.

If he gets weeks for that I'm giving up on football might start watching netball instead

netball is a much tougher sport.

Serious question. Why hasn't Viney been charged with rough conduct causing injury to Georgiou?

Don't think you can get done for hurting a team mate

I don't know if there are more broken jaws or not. But if there have been, one reason is likely to be the greater force with which players collide. they're bigger, stronger and faster. When they collide it's a more powerful collision than would have occurred in years gone by.

If we have any Physics teachers perhaps they could put Newton's Second Law of motion into English (basically force equals mass times acceleration).

Forget the physics. The main difference is that players are moving faster as muscles etc are improved in the gym (and maybe leg and arm bone is strengthening at the same time). Whereas nothing has been done to make jaw bones harder. Maybe players should be on a diet which requires a lot of hard chewing.

If Jack Viney actually wanted to hurt Lynch, he'd be pushing up daisies with Georgiou......

If Jack Viney actually wanted to hurt Lynch, he'd be pushing up daisies with Georgiou......

Can you imagine if Viney had actually maintained his speed and at the point of impact pushed up and into Lynch & locking his back leg? The injuries would have been horrendous. Viney absorbed the impact to lessen the damage. He could have really hurt Lynch and Georgiou and probably himself. He should be praised for his actions.

Here's a scary thought, imagine Viney did decide to run through Lynch.

Lynch and Georgiou should consider themselves very, very lucky.

Roos talks about Viney bump:

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2014-05-06/media-conference-roos-on-viney-charge

Maybe some hope.

From Jesse Hogan at the Age:

MRP member Joel Bowden said that when he and his fellow panellists ... attempted to grade the offence of rough conduct by Viney against Adelaide's Tom Lynch, they struggled to make any progress.

The decision to refer the incident to the tribunal ... was very different to Adelaide's Richard Douglas ... when it queried the severity of the formulaic penalty that Douglas would have attracted.

"We decided very quickly, unlike the Callan Ward and Richard Douglas case. In that we took a long, long time to try and grade and then sent it to the tribunal. That example probably helped us, in that we were very quick to say, 'Well, this is really, really difficult'. And we only get to look at the vision, and we don't get an account from the player and can't understand what he was thinking," Bowden said.

"There is a lot of debate, and in sending it straight to the tribunal the MRP is not necessarily judging guilt or innocence in this. What we want is a thorough examination of the evidence to be heard by a jury."

... Bowden said he hoped the tribunal jury (Henwood, Schimmelbusch and Dunne) would come to a verdict "that is transparent, that the public can understand".

Follow it here.

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-06/live-viney-fronts-tribunal

Nathan Schmook:

Melbourne also seeking to call Paul Roos, to give evidence on how Viney has been taught to protect his body after suffering concussions through his short career.

Excellent.

Comment From Eric What time roughly will the decisions be made?

16:58

Nathan Schmook:

There are no guarantees, but i think this could be a long one. Say 6.30pm

Decision not far away. Nervous times.

Its a shame that this incident is over shadowing what was probably Jack's best game thus far of his 18 game career.

He's going to be a star... a hard star.

17:26

Comment From Guest 1

Have they agreed to let Roos testify?

17:26

Nathan Schmook:

No.

LOL. Such a fair process when we cant even give the evidence that will help our player get off.

I have some concerns at how hard he goes at the contest. I don't think he is guilty on this one but it is a very fine line regarding his attack on the contest and opponent.

Be very clear - I love Jack and the way he plays - I detest the way the game has become so sanitised that it makes me worry about suspensions to a player like Jack Viney.

That we as a club are prepared to defend this vigorously shows weve turned the corner at last.

It f'n ridiculous in the first place. MRP know it and have passed the buck...bunch of twats

Should be dismissed out of hand as no case to answer.

Nanny state ffs

Nathan Schmook:

AG: "As he took the ball I proceeded to tackle him with our momentum going forward. Tom takes possession of the ball."

Oh god.

Coaches hardly ever go into a tribunal with their players. Paul Roos is there with Jack showing his support. This shows a true care for his players and a real father figure. Still can't believe he is coaching us! God love him.

JV: "I felt like i had a reasonable opportunity to win the football.

"There was a point in time where the ball could have bounced my way or in favour of Tom.

"I turned to brace myself for impact because i saw Georgiou and Tom Lynch travelling at full pace.

"Not at any stage was i trying to bump them. I was purely trying to brace myself for impact.

"It happened it a very short space of time. It was about half a second where the ball could have bounced either way."

JV: "I felt like i had a reasonable opportunity to win the football.

"There was a point in time where the ball could have bounced my way or in favour of Tom.

"I turned to brace myself for impact because i saw Georgiou and Tom Lynch travelling at full pace.

"Not at any stage was i trying to bump them. I was purely trying to brace myself for impact.

"It happened it a very short space of time. It was about half a second where the ball could have bounced either way."

The funny thing is his description sounds exactly how it looks, and he'll still get rubbed out.

Too hot/hard/unclear for the MRP. If they cant make a judgement ( and I don't blame them) how on earth can anyone else.

This accident is unique and shouldn't have got this far.

17:38

Nathan Schmook:

JV outlines he has suffered a broken jaw and three concussions in his career.

17:38

Nathan Schmook:

He has done specific training to better protect himself going into contests.

17:39

Nathan Schmook:

Had half a second to judge what to do

17:39

Nathan Schmook:

JV: "I don't raise my elbow or lean into the bump. I just brace myself for the incoming traffic."

17:42

Nathan Schmook:

Viney talking through the vision, shows he stops striding once ball bounces towards Lynch.

17:42

Nathan Schmook:

strong case so far from Dees

17:43

Nathan Schmook:

JV: After the collision "I end up going to win the football, which i was trying to do in the first place."

Nathan Schmook:

Five elements to AFL case:

1. Did Viney bump?
2. Did that cause forceful contact?
3. Was he contesting the ball?
4. Did he have a reasonable alternative?
5. Was the bump cause by circumstances outside his control?