Clearly had plenty of time to avoid hard contact even if he was initially going for the ball (which I doubt).

If Merret now thinks he can get away with that in future, he'll regret it when he hits a player from one of the big clubs.

I wish the boys had have stood up for pederson. it should've been on.
Our boys rarely stand up for one another.

He has already taken the mark before dog merret leaves the ground. It was after the mark.

Not even a 50m penalty.....

I am sure we got a 50 for that as the umpire reported Merrett at the time.

I am sure I heard a discussion on SEN last week where they said the MRP has overturned nearly 100% of umpires reports this year to the point they asked why would umpires bother anymore. The tradition continues, the MRP spits in the umpires face, who would have seen this act for what it was, a late reckless hit. You can always pull out of those situations to minimise impact if you so choose.

Absolutely [censored] up. Lets instruct our players to deliberately smash opposition heads in when trying to spoil hey.

Agreed Earl and I and wish you luck in achieving the high office of Marquess in the next Honours List.

Thanks BBO the whisper is that I have the inside running for a move up the hierarchy sooner rather than later just have to wait for Australia Day I think for the announcement.

Don't tell anyone else but it seems the more actions I take to line my own pockets, the more kudos I get in the peerage stakes. Funny that but keep it to yourself please. I don't want to dilute people's respect for their betters!

Thanks BBO the whisper is that I have the inside running for a move up the hierarchy sooner rather than later just have to wait for Australia Day I think for the announcement.

Don't tell anyone else but it seems the more actions I take to line my own pockets, the more kudos I get in the peerage stakes. Funny that but keep it to yourself please. I don't want to dilute people's respect for their betters!

Agreed Earl. The chattering classes must be kept in check.

BTW. Good luck in your aspirations.

It is the inconsistency that really pisses people off, myself included.

The contact was high, the impact was significant, and it was late.

The bloody maggot didn't even give a 50 m for late contact after the mark had been taken. One sees a hell of a lot of 50 for far less than that.

Compare this with Dawes getting two weeks (down to one) for a high chest late arm contact that rode up to the chin, with no consequences to the 'victim'

Can anyone say the MRP is consistent? I can only think of another word starting with co.....!

your argument is not looking too strong hardtack

the mark has been taken and merret hasn't even left the ground

definite 50 metres penalty

strong case for negligent or reckless

at a min should have got carry over points after any deductions

again mrb lacks consistency

I'm not particularly concerned over what people think of my argument. I base it purely on the speed at which both players were travelling when the collision occurred, and despite what others might think, I still stand by my belief that neither could have avoided the contact. Regardless... whatever any of us think, we have no influence.

Edited August 4, 201411 yr by hardtack

I would like to know which members of the MRP made this decision... Anything in common with the panel that gave Jack Viney a few weeks?

Joke.

Is Gustavo Fring on the MRV? Just checking.

The only problem with that photo is that it doesn't show the speed at which both players were closing in on the ball. I honestly could not see Merrett pulling up (or out of) that contest at all. Just an unfortunate incident.

Rubbish. Watch the video, it does.

He has done it a number of times. He hits Pedo in the face with a forearm and his hand then touches the ball. All after Pedo has marked it. He didn't have to strike him, he chose to.

I personally don't give a rats he got off. However every expert including Carey, who always says let em off, says he deserved 2 at a minimum. Those who said it tonight were Carey, Darcy, Watson, Dunstall, Healy, Sheahan, Huddo, Robbo and then Bomber and Roos by their smiles and refusal to comment.The only dissenting voice is Lynch his manager.

Edited August 4, 201411 yr by Redleg

Our game is soft enough when it comes to punishing contact... I'm not upset Merrett got off, would have been nice to see one of our blokes go that hard when the ball was there to be won...

And before u get your knockers in a knot it was a spoil attempt not a king hit... Watch netball if u dislike contact

Sure thing, tough guy.

Rubbish. Watch the video, it does.

He has done it a number of times. He hits Pedo in the face with a forearm and his hand then touches the ball. All after Pedo has marked it. He didn't have to strike him, he chose to.

I personally don't give a rats he got off. However every expert including Carey, who always says let em off, says he deserved 2 at a minimum. Those who said it tonight were Carey, Darcy, Watson, Dunstall, Healy, Sheahan, Huddo, Robbo and then Bomber and Roos by their smiles and refusal to comment.The only dissenting voice is Lynch his manager.

I have watched the video numerous times. He came across Pedersen wth both arms stretched out in an attempt to get at the ball and it is his elbow that connects...there was no intent to strike him in the head... that was just a consequence of how they were both travellng.

I have watched the video numerous times. He came across Pedersen wth both arms stretched out in an attempt to get at the ball and it is his elbow that connects...there was no intent to strike him in the head... that was just a consequence of how they were both travellng.

Hardtrack I say it again. All season the protection of the head has been about consequences, not about intensions. A player who goes the bump and goes high is gone depending on the medical report. I don't care what Merrets intentions were, he got Pedo high, it was reckless, high contact and I say high impact. That means points and possible suspension, not a clearance. A hip, forearm, a bump vs a forearm jolt what is the difference?

The only problem with that photo is that it doesn't show the speed at which both players were closing in on the ball. I honestly could not see Merrett pulling up (or out of) that contest at all. Just an unfortunate incident.

Speed is not relevant. Pedo had clearly completed the mark before merrett attempted to spoil. Is think at a minimum it should have been treated like the Dawes hit ob Rance but higher impact so possibly 2 weeks with am early plea. In the modern game you simply cannot arrive at a contest late a clumsily whack a guy in the face after he has completed a mark and not get reported.

Hardtrack I say it again. All season the protection of the head has been about consequences, not about intensions. A player who goes the bump and goes high is gone depending on the medical report. I don't care what Merrets intentions were, he got Pedo high, it was reckless, high contact and I say high impact. That means points and possible suspension, not a clearance. A hip, forearm, a bump vs a forearm jolt what is the difference?

That was never my argument. My argument was about those who are claiming it was intentional and about the fact that there are many here who seem to believe there is a massive conspiracy against the club. I don't believe that I mentioned anywhere that he should have gotten off scott free.

I can't even... This game has become a joke.

I have watched the video numerous times. He came across Pedersen wth both arms stretched out in an attempt to get at the ball and it is his elbow that connects...there was no intent to strike him in the head... that was just a consequence of how they were both travellng.

The AFL will be hoping like hell Fyfe doesn't get most votes in the Brownlow.

I'm sure he didn't intend to clash heads, but he was held liable for the consequence.

Even though they were dissimilar incidents, if intent had any bearing then Fyfe would never have been suspended.

Just another mystifying, inconsistent judgement by this inept bunch.

Just saw the Stevie J one, how the hell did he get one week? Woeful week from the MRP.

That was never my argument. My argument was about those who are claiming it was intentional and about the fact that there are many here who seem to believe there is a massive conspiracy against the club. I don't believe that I mentioned anywhere that he should have gotten off scott free.

No conspiracy but a poor decision from the mrp...loved Bomber Thompsons reaction on 360, it was priceless.

Dawes was rubbed out for a week I think they are about the same, and there is a conspiracy against mfc,

Clearly had plenty of time to avoid hard contact even if he was initially going for the ball (which I doubt).

If Merret now thinks he can get away with that in future, he'll regret it when he hits a player from one of the big clubs.

if he done that v adam goods he would have gotthree weeks

What a farce - AFL are so hypocritical. They play favourites with interstate teams.

Not a good week - footy is doing my blood pressure major damage.

The interstate teams north of the NSW border are fake football clubs designed by the AFL corporate style commission to hopefully ' grow ' the game in the northern rugby dominated states. The strategy will never work and is only a pimple of interest to the ordinary people up there. I was in Canberra last weekend which is supposed to reflect the culture of the rest of Australia at least a little bit. Forget it, it is nearly pure NSW culturally and Sydney centric. Their hotels and clubs are dominated by NRL with AFL a mere sideline.

Let's deal in the facts shall we? The contact was high and the force was high - it spread Pedo's nose across his face. Whether it was intentional or not, it was at the very least negligent. On top of that, Merrett has priors. He was reported by the field umpire at the time. As the football world has been told time and time again, if you choose to make contact and that contact ends up being made with the head, then you take the consequences. This incident, at the very least warranted a reprimand for Merrett.

For those who subscribe to the idea that the game has become soft, you may well be correct, but while we have the rules we have, let's at least apply them in a consistent manner. By the way, I hear Rod Grinter would like to renew acquaintances with Terry Wallace.