FWIW, penalty accepted.

11 minutes ago, Redlegs Too said:

I would be interested in knowing how those who think Bernie innocent would react if the elbow had been thrown at Bernie.  I think we would all be calling for the suspension of the other player.

I wouldn't be. The act was stupid and reckless, no argument there, the contact though was so minimal he has basically been suspended for his intent, not the actual act or the consequence. As we know the tribunal no days is all about the consequence and with there wasn't one, except for a bit of massive over acting. 

If this had been directed at Bernie and he did the same as the North player I would be more disappointed in him acting so much and not fussed by no suspension. 

2 minutes ago, Chris said:

I wouldn't be. The act was stupid and reckless, no argument there, the contact though was so minimal he has basically been suspended for his intent, not the actual act or the consequence. As we know the tribunal no days is all about the consequence and with there wasn't one, except for a bit of massive over acting. 

If this had been directed at Bernie and he did the same as the North player I would be more disappointed in him acting so much and not fussed by no suspension. 

I'm all for bernie getting off because im a Dees man but i think that intent should be the thing that weighs most at the MRP. I hate seeing people being outed for accidental high bumps yet players like sam mitchell giving little knees to players off the ball get nothing because it wasnt hard enough. What bernie did was stupid and deserves a week, deserves it more than big sandilands did for his bump.

1 minute ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

I'm all for bernie getting off because im a Dees man but i think that intent should be the thing that weighs most at the MRP. I hate seeing people being outed for accidental high bumps yet players like sam mitchell giving little knees to players off the ball get nothing because it wasnt hard enough. What bernie did was stupid and deserves a week, deserves it more than big sandilands did for his bump.

I agree that intent should have a large bearing on the punishment, the problem is that Bernie actually barely made contact, should we suspend people on intent alone because the contact was actually barely there. Surely a mix of the two would be best, if you intend to hit someone, and actually hit them then you are gone, and the harder you hit them or the worse the intent to hit the longer you are gone. 

If Bernie had connected with his chin I would be comfortable with him sitting on the sidelines for a few weeks, and it would be well deserved as it was a stupid sniper act.

14 hours ago, bing181 said:

I'd be rather partial to replacing Vince with Hunt. Not sure if he's ready yet, but starting to do some decent things at Casey. ANB strikes me as more of general purpose utility with a good tank, but Vince provides us with a lot of drive, and I'm not sure ANB has that kind of penetration to his kicking. (not sure Hunt does either, but if he can gain an extra 10m through running, we'd get the same result).

An opportunity also for Tyson to step up.

That would, assuming no other changes, leave two first years on HBF - is that too much risk?

ANB would seem a better option, freeing BK to spend more time in the midfield. 

4 minutes ago, Chris said:

I agree that intent should have a large bearing on the punishment, the problem is that Bernie actually barely made contact, should we suspend people on intent alone because the contact was actually barely there. Surely a mix of the two would be best, if you intend to hit someone, and actually hit them then you are gone, and the harder you hit them or the worse the intent to hit the longer you are gone. 

If Bernie had connected with his chin I would be comfortable with him sitting on the sidelines for a few weeks, and it would be well deserved as it was a stupid sniper act.

Yeah its all so diffucult because if he hit him harder in the chest it would have been let off. Its all very confusing. MRP discussions are hard because more often than not i dont even know what they should do. This instance i think is worth a week but lets face it if Hodge had done it there wouldnt even be an issue.

4 minutes ago, monoccular said:

That would, assuming no other changes, leave two first years on HBF - is that too much risk?

Yeah that is a very fair point. I like the sound of Hunt's speed though. I expect N Jones to go back there a bit on the weekend. With tyson, oliver and most importantly Viney in the middle we have the in and under ball winners to let jones play back but not for the whole game i wouln't think.

Anyone have footage of the incident?

Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

Anyone have footage of the incident?

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-04-11/vince-charged-by-match-review-panel

14 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Yeah its all so diffucult because if he hit him harder in the chest it would have been let off. Its all very confusing. MRP discussions are hard because more often than not i dont even know what they should do. This instance i think is worth a week but lets face it if Hodge had done it there wouldnt even be an issue.

The fact the North player didn't even hold his throat, or rub it, or look in any discomfort says to me he was barely touched. You are right in saying that if it was a favourite son of the AFL then he wouldn't have even been fined. Insufficient force would have been the reason. 

1 minute ago, Chris said:

Insufficient force would have been the reason. 

haha yep I swear it translates directly to "Sufficient Popularity"

I don't know why people are complaining about ether he hurt him or not. The MRP graded it as low impact.  It was the intentional and high contact that stuffed him. 

2 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

I don't know why people are complaining about ether he hurt him or not. The MRP graded it as low impact.  It was the intentional and high contact that stuffed him. 

Agreed. It is all about intent. He could have stopped and just chested him but he chose to run past, lift the elbow. I hope he gets some sort of internal punishment. Really stupid from a senior player.

4 hours ago, sue said:

The fact that what most posters said on here came true is in itself no evidence that the tribunal is consistent - just that this one was pretty blatant and deserved a week.  The question is would a favoured son have got a lesser penalty.  We can't tell for sure without entering a parallel universe, but there is enough history to suggest that they may have. 

Sure probably most of their run-of-the-mill decisions are reasonably 'consistent'.  It's the egregious ones that favour certain stars which are the reason the tribunal is held in contempt by many of us.

I can't recall a case in recent times, where a guy has raised an elbow in that manner and gotten away with it. If, for example, Joel Selwood was the instigator, do you really believe the tribunal would have let it go? 

Still trying to work out why he did it at all

just a total brain fade and dumb. 

The consequences could be massive. Bernie better pray bloody hard we win

6 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Still trying to work out why he did it at all

just a total brain fade and dumb. 

The consequences could be massive. Bernie better pray bloody hard we win

He was leaning into a bump, but MacMinion pulled up quicker than expected, it was just a follow through from misjudgement. 

Clumsy more than than vicious or stupid. 

9 minutes ago, Deestroy All said:

He was leaning into a bump, but MacMinion pulled up quicker than expected, it was just a follow through from misjudgement. 

Clumsy more than than vicious or stupid. 

Maybe. But when you raise an elbow whilst in motion then the outcome is not always controlled. 

It was always going to be ugly. 

No need for it. The ball had left the area...

I can't help but feel that this stupid act has cost the dees a shot a beating Collingwood. He is one of our top 5 players. He is irreplaceable in the best 22 right now. 

1 hour ago, Adzman said:

I can't help but feel that this stupid act has cost the dees a shot a beating Collingwood. He is one of our top 5 players. He is irreplaceable in the best 22 right now. 

We all thought we had zero chance when we went down to Geelong last season minus Jesse Hogan

Vince is awesome but he is one player and if him being out costs us the game we may as well pack it in

The problem isn't just Vince missing. They get sidebottom amd Varcoe back this week which are big one for them.

So Vince missing hurts.

2 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

The problem isn't just Vince missing. They get sidebottom amd Varcoe back this week which are big one for them.

So Vince missing hurts.

I don't think that really changes the point though. It wouldn't really matter who we were playing - all the clubs have good players you could reel off and say "that hurts". 

I agree with HH. It's a bummer, but definitely no reason to chuck in the towel (I'm not suggesting you are) or allow it to erode our confidence too much, as he is but one of a team of players.

20 hours ago, Redlegs Too said:

I would be interested in knowing how those who think Bernie innocent would react if the elbow had been thrown at Bernie.  I think we would all be calling for the suspension of the other player.

Fair enough. But in that case, the predictable outcome would have been the other player gets off & Bernie gets cited for staging or some other charge that doesn't yet exist.

The tribunal still can't escape the perception, held almost universally, that there's one rule for some & another rule for others. This case only bears it out. The only thing about that tribunal that's consistent & predictable is its inconsistency. 

22 hours ago, H_T said:

Correct.

And it was a stupid decision by Vince. It could prove very costly given his form and he has been fantastic on the likes of Pendlebury previously. 

I know he has many credits for people around here on Demonland and there hasn't been that much angst. But he does have form with left field incidents such as this. And he's effectively put his team and club under the pump as a result. The return of Sidebottom to the Pies line up strengthens their midfield whilst ours has been weakened significantly IMV.

Whilst I absolutely hate to see Bernie rubbed, Brayshaw and Garlett are also pretty handy 'ins' for us.

 

 

2 hours ago, Nasher said:

I don't think that really changes the point though. It wouldn't really matter who we were playing - all the clubs have good players you could reel off and say "that hurts". 

I agree with HH. It's a bummer, but definitely no reason to chuck in the towel (I'm not suggesting you are) or allow it to erode our confidence too much, as he is but one of a team of players.

Just makes it harder. We lose quality, they gain quality. 

3 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Just makes it harder. We lose quality, they gain quality. 

And someone else gets an opportunity 

Not good but move on