The other problem with all these things is that footy is played is played at a million miles an hour - look at the collision at full pace.

Unfortunately - MRP decisions are made in slo mo.

Ball was in dispute, hows it different from any collision injury when two player intent on the ball collide?

Jake Spencer got three weeks (I think) last year for being a complete unco and crashing into McEvoy (again, IIRC). You hurt someone by bumping, you go.

The crux comes into whether he actually chose to bump and if he had an alternative to bumping.

I watched the footage on the AFL website over and over and these are the key points IMO.

• Initially he is chasing a bouncing, loose ball at full speed. He has every right to do this.
• On the final bounce, the ball sits up and it only then becomes clear that Lynch will take possession before Viney does. (until then, the ball could have changed direction meaning Lynch could have missed it and Viney could have run on to it).
• Viney responds to this by slowing considerably and in that very short period (I would love to know exactly how long it is from when the ball last bounces and it becomes clear that Lynch will take possession and whent the contact is made - very short period of time) he braces for impact.
• In that short period of time, there is no way he could change direction to avoid the contact.
• At no stage did Lynch secure possession. The ball was still bobbling around when contact was made.
• When two people pursue a loose ball and reach it at a very similar time, a collision is inevitable.
• Lynch took possession of the ball and was propelled forward so he could not brace himself.
• Viney barely had time to brace for impact.
• Any change of direction for Viney was because he was following the ball, not because he was trying to bump.

Would love to say that would be enough but history is against us.

does anyone have any source that lynch broke his jaw on the left side?

Interesting - it looked to me like he was pulling up but had a fair bit of speed.

It is just ridiculous, if it were someone like Jordan Lewis who smashes people all the time, we probably wouldn't even be having this discussion.

I suppose because of the injury it needs to be looked at and that is fair enough. Maybe the MRP thought it would be better for the tribunal to deal with it as it then absolves them of responsibility.

Im not sure it means anything re guilt or length of penalty. I think any incident causing a significant injury especial to head and neck will go this way. Hears hoping for a common sense outcome

If Gillon McLachlan wants to change the face of football or show that he understands the football community- then he can start here.

I suppose because of the injury it needs to be looked at and that is fair enough. Maybe the MRP thought it would be better for the tribunal to deal with it as it then absolves them of responsibility.

Let's hope so!

What does it mean when it's referred directly to the tribunal? Does it mean they were unable to classify it? What is he then being charged with?

they just leave it up to the tribunal

ie an incident has been referred for clarification and possible charge (i think)

mrp has always had this capability esp when incidents don't fit easily into their formulaic approach

Having had a look at the vision again, I think the following points are in his favour:

1) He was initially looking to win the ball and only at the last second did he change his action and bump Lynch. It was more of a 'brace' position then a clear election to bump.

2) He had little choice, if he didn't brace for the bump he would have been steamrolled by Lynch who was coming at a fast pace.

3) Lynch had the footy so it was in-play, not off the ball like Douglas' bump on Ward.

4) He didn't leave the ground.

5) He is significantly shorter than Lynch so it's impossible for him to bump Lynch in the head (while not leaving the ground) without Lynch going low. The reason why Lynch went low was because he got nudged forward by Georgiou. It is impossible in that micro-second to see Lynch get pushed forward and then change your action.

6) Was the broken jaw caused by the head clash or Viney's shoulder? If the former then he shouldn't be made to pay.

However I have no faith in the tribunal system and their arbitrary decisions. It is decided on the basis of injury, which is an absolute disgrace because you should be punished for what you can control (i.e. conduct) not what you can't (i.e. an unfortunate and unforseeable set of circumstances that results in an injury).

I'm expecting no other result than being shafted by the tribunal in much the same way as the umpires did to us on the weekend.

I really am sick of seeing players banned for legitimate tough footy and snipers being given far less significant penalties for blatant and intentional dog acts.

I hope the club gets on the front foot and has a few things to say about it, especially if Jack is suspended.

We've been made the scapegoat for enough "rule" clarifications... i.e. tanking.

I don't like a "persecution complex" , the "its always us" but there was a message sent on the Trengove sling that hadn't been sent before and I am scared the tribunal will send another first time message.

Let's be realistic. It doesn't matter how the injury happened, it wouldn't have happened without the bump. He's stuffed - the AFL have been super clear about this.

A real shame, because I think he is perhaps the one who gave us the most drive on Saturday - he just bullocked the ball forward constantly.

So let me get this straight. If Lynch had bumped Viney and in the process Lynch's jaw is broken then it is Viney's Fault? Rubbish.

Secondy who are the bio mechanics experts that can determine when in the impact the injury happened and who caused it. It may have happened when Lynch fell onto Georgio's shin, therefore the bump incidental and the injury the result of a good tackle,

I have watched it frame by frame and Viney was virtually stopped. It is impossible to bump someone when stationary. He was bracing for impact, in self protection mode. Lynch was cannoned into Viney by Georgio's tackle. Viney after the impact was forced backwards.

So if Lynch ran into a virtually stationary Viney then give Lynch 3 weeks, what rubbish.

To the AFL - Accidents happen. A 175cm player with one foot still on the ground both legs bent is hit by a much heavier 191cm player standing albeit with bent legs and the big guy gets hurt, not one player was remonstrating with Viney no umpires thought in deserved a free, that is an accident, it is a contact sport after all.

The head high contact, and therefore the injury as well, were not made as a result of Viney's bump but as a result of the 'pile up' effect as Georgio also came into the contest.

Neither Viney nor Glass-jaw were in motion of their own at the time!

The crux comes into whether he actually chose to bump and if he had an alternative to bumping.

I watched the footage on the AFL website over and over and these are the key points IMO.

• Initially he is chasing a bouncing, loose ball at full speed. He has every right to do this.
• On the final bounce, the ball sits up and it only then becomes clear that Lynch will take possession before Viney does. (until then, the ball could have changed direction meaning Lynch could have missed it and Viney could have run on to it).
• Viney responds to this by slowing considerably and in that very short period (I would love to know exactly how long it is from when the ball last bounces and it becomes clear that Lynch will take possession and whent the contact is made - very short period of time) he braces for impact.
• In that short period of time, there is no way he could change direction to avoid the contact.
• At no stage did Lynch secure possession. The ball was still bobbling around when contact was made.
• When two people pursue a loose ball and reach it at a very similar time, a collision is inevitable.
• Lynch took possession of the ball and was propelled forward so he could not brace himself.
• Viney barely had time to brace for impact.
• Any change of direction for Viney was because he was following the ball, not because he was trying to bump.

Would love to say that would be enough but history is against us.

Great summary. I would add that there is a difference between bumping abnd bracing for impact.Viney clearly braced rather than choosing to bump.

But its the MFC - well oil beef hooked.

If he gets much for that, the football I knew and loved is dead and buried

well at least jack can give his version and can be supported by an advocate and witnesses

all of which he couldn't do with the mrp

Roo, not the most impartial commentator - "nothing to look at in that" or words to that effect

What does it mean when it's referred directly to the tribunal? Does it mean they were unable to classify it? What is he then being charged with?

what does it mean...means there is no consistency about the AFL. Means the MRP is a bunch of spuds. Means No one dares call this game physical anymore lest some namby pambys wont bring little Joshua Elton or Lulu Pixie Flower to f'n Auskick !!

iTS A GAME WHERE BODIES COLLIDE.

There was no malice. Had there been he'd have no head let alone an accidental broken jaw !!!

Its a rough game AFL...live with it fffs

I love it! finally a Melbourne player prepared to hurt the opposition. All power to him.

He is in trouble - how many get referred straight to the tribunal and "he cannot accept an early plea on this matter."

its going straight to tribunal because they can't make a decision, they want to find out if he is at fault at all, he should get off.

its going straight to tribunal because they can't make a decision, they want to find out if he is at fault at all, he should get off.

if he doesn't get off the games not Aussie rules football anymore, its netball

what a pity it wasn't mitch robinson.......would put "bruise free" to bed

What does it mean when it's referred directly to the tribunal? Does it mean they were unable to classify it? What is he then being charged with?

The AFL has tweeted a link to the explanation.

Hope this works: "Some information from the Tribunal Booklet on the various reasons cases can be referred directly to the Tribunal: pic.twitter.com/lVF0IJM7LK"

I'm with Dermie

Unfortunately Dermott Brereton is not likely to be an advocate the AFL will listen to very seriously.