I don't understand why Barrett is so confused. To me it is actually black and white

If your sole purpose is to get the ball and you have incidental high contact that is fine. But if you choose the other route and bump someone then you're in trouble.

How does this guy have a job seriously???

don't you mean it is actually pink and purple?

I especially liked the line about the sole voice of this column. He's like a footy version of martin Luther king - one man against the many

barrett is just trying to portray he's relevant.

he isnt

Give it a [censored] rest Purple. The ship has sailed and sainity prevailed. If anything the decision has put an end to the ridiculous suspensions because of accidental head contact. Best decision for football in years!

?He posts so much more Melbourne related content than any other club, seriously who killed his puppy

I think he tried out for a gig once but the club said "Sorry we don't need Clark Kent we need Superman"

Boom Boom!

I don't really care, I guess, but who actually is this guy? Has he any footy pedigree? Or is he genetically the mongrel he appears to be?

He doesn't seem to think that there is any difference at all between a bump, which in my mind is a wilful attacking manoeuvre, and an incidental collision where two guys are both intent on the ball and not the other guy.

Pretty simple in my, and most people's eyes.

Edited June 4, 201411 yr by monoccular

i don't know what all the angst about this is. surely 'the viney bump' has bumped us past the bruise-free tag we were previously clobbered with. most commentators have given viney plaudits for his style of football, as far as i can see. i also don't get the barrett-bashing, although i may be missing something as i only occasionally see him on the footy show.

I actually agree with him (I feel sick saying that) that there has been a shift with the adjudication of certain incidents that for a while the players had known that they were off limits. The head over the ball incidents in the last few weeks have all been cleared, this definitely flies in the face of what the MRP/tribunal have been putting in place in the last 2-3 years.

What I don't understand is why, and what I also don't understand is how he thinks Viney's collision is the same as these guys. The biggest difference is that Viney had no other choice but to brace for contact; Hannebury, Cooney, and Hocking did have time to choose to sit off from the ball and tackle when they picked it up.

The MRP/tribunal have created confusion, but it is because they didn't throw it out in the first place that this has happened.

I also want to make the point that the beginning of the article is lazy, pathetic, emotive journalism. By pointing to Lynch's recovery he's immediately trying to create sympathy for his argument and make Viney look like a thug who got away with it, and his constant reference to people "frothing at the mouth" is extremely disrespectful to the fans. He really fails to see what everybody else sees, Jack was acting bracing for unavoidable contact.

Wow. What prattle.

He really is a vindictive little boy. I read that article and seriously felt as though I was reading a rant by an immature teen.

Sports journalism is in a dark place.

Thank goodness for the many knowledgable and witty folk here on 'Land.

Digging his own media grave?

He was also the lone journalistic voice, if I recall correctly, that called bulldust on the Demons swapping Pick 2 for Dom Tyson and Christian Salem.

barrett is just trying to portray he's relevant.

he isnt

completely disagree. He is relevant as he gets coverage in papers, on websites, television and radio. He is just rarely right.

His major problem always has been that once he commits to a position it is locked in concrete irrespective of what unfolds.

Many here dislike Robbo - I quite like him and I give him him his credit because on occasions I have heard him completely change his opinion ( and admit he was wrong). I have also heard him say that he is unsure on certain issues whereas Barrett would rather be black and white wrong than admit that there are layers and complexities to issues.

I see the Viney incident as very grey. I dont think anyone can categorically state whether it was a collision or intention to bump ( apart from taking Viney at his word) therefore there was only one conclusion that could be reached - not guilty. To be suspended as Barrett suggests you first have to be sure that the incident was a bump not a collision ( which could not be clearly concluded) and then if it is a bump you have to conclude there was no other option.

By Barretts very flawed logic you would have to suspend Dunne for his bump on the weekend.

I stupidly just opened the column on the afl app.... Read the first couple of paragraphs and vomited a little the bloke has no concept of football at all - seems to think, act and write like the little nancy boy who was always picked last in school yard teams and has never got past it. How he is involved with big league journalism just amazes me

Barrett is just the football equivalent of a celebrity chaser who pumps themselves up a 'newsbreaker'. I don't know why everyone here feels such angst about him.

The Viney ruling was important in helping to set a precedent and a new agenda for deliberate bumps vis-a-vis unavoidable collisions. So I don't have an issue with him talking about 'pre- and post-Viney'. The fact that Viney plays for Melbourne is irrelevant to that agenda. (I think it would be good if Melbourne supporters could buy out of the victimisation mentality and leave that to Collingwood supporters, who are the masters of it).

The major problem with Barrett's position is that he thinks the Viney ruling was incorrect purely because it involved severe injury, and that it subsequently created uncertainty in the minds of players. But what has really created that uncertainty is not the Viney outcome, but previous rulings by the MRP that too harshly dealt with unavoidable collisions resulting in injury. If anything, the Viney decision has helped clear it up, not further confuse it.

The Viney decision was correct though, because it ruled that unavoidable incidents on the field, made in the heat and intensity of the game, ought not be punished. Barrett's position is like suggesting there's no difference between an accident, manslaughter and murder, when we all know that the issue is intent.

Barrett is upset he has been relegated from the Second Lady of Football to the Third Lady of Football.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-06-02/worst-passage-of-play-of-the-year
i'm probably reading too much into it, but Gary is pretty keen to take swipes at Damien

Who is Barrett? Who did he play for? How many games?

Who is Barrett? Who did he play for? How many games?

Played for Richmond 120 games.

He should stick to reporting. It happens all the time to mugs like this. Their egos get out of hand and they think they are an oracle of information and opinion in the league (like hutchy before hand).

I remember when he was venomously defending the Viney decision on MMM, I could just make out Brownless muttering under his breath saying "You've got no idea."

Stick to reporting "Warrior", your opinion means nothing.

Edited June 6, 201411 yr by Pipefitter

Who is Barrett? Who did he play for? How many games?

He is a prominent ex young lib who, after failing to secure the safe seat of Kooyong, ventured into football journalism. Wiki

He was also the lone journalistic voice, if I recall correctly, that called bulldust on the Demons swapping Pick 2 for Dom Tyson and Christian Salem.

Damo may work as a newspaper and online journalist but he took the lead of DC comics with his commentary on that one and just retconned it out of his back story!

He was also the lone journalistic voice, if I recall correctly, that called bulldust on the Demons swapping Pick 2 for Dom Tyson and Christian Salem.

*Without having seen Tyson play...

He was also the lone journalistic voice, if I recall correctly, that called bulldust on the Demons swapping Pick 2 for Dom Tyson and Christian Salem.

Scattergun.

Tyson having a consistent and stellar season is the best revenge the Demons can have.

Wise words often bear repeating.

Much prefer this kind to any wrestling fans out there...