Razor's call on Big M's jumper pull when they were both holding. Typical Razor always giving a 50/50 against us.

Should not be umpiring at this level. Always the show pony and making sure he is the one getting noticed. That's not an umpire's role

On 4/25/2016 at 10:56 AM, Wiseblood said:

Totally agree.  I like Carey, but he then spent the next minute or so trying to defend Rance's actions.  Rubbish.  The bloke committed a dog act and there is no excuse for it.  

I think Carey was being told to go easy on Rance, he was definitely holding back on what he really thought imo 

I don't buy the out of character rubbish either, right after he did it he tried to play for a free kick of Jack Viney, he's just a weak dog.

What did Vince do? I didn't see it at the game, is he in trouble? 

For the reasons pointed out by other posters, does Rance's  dog act qualify for direct referral to the Tribunal? 

6 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Razor's call on Big M's jumper pull when they were both holding. Typical Razor always giving a 50/50 against us.

Should not be umpiring at this level. Always the show pony and making sure he is the one getting noticed. That's not an umpire's role

First time i have seen Roos completely baffled with some of the umpiring decisions. Usually he is pretty measured but he was pretty ticked and couldn't hide his frustration.

1 minute ago, mdemon said:

For the reasons pointed out by other posters, does Rance's  dog act qualify for direct referral to the Tribunal? 

It should. 

Same (if not worse) than throwing a punch at the head of another player.

Lucky he didn't contact the brain stem.

2 minutes ago, mdemon said:

For the reasons pointed out by other posters, does Rance's  dog act qualify for direct referral to the Tribunal? 

They came down hard on Cameron and May, whilst this incident is completely different they are trying to set standards. Needs to go for a couple. 

IMHO Rance will get two, with a likely plea down to one.

Viney won't get anything; it was forceful and aggressive, but there's no way that can be construed as striking.

34 minutes ago, Mondê said:

What did Vince do? I didn't see it at the game, is he in trouble? 

He came in with a few hard palms to the upper chest. I assume he'll be fine but they looked like they hurt >:)

Dog act by Rance, bet he would squeal like a pig if it happened to him or a team mate. 2 weeks down to 1. Rance really showed some prissiness when Jack came after him. Shows how tough he really is.....................as tough as a bowl full of dampened sorbent !!  He did the soiling !

 

25 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

IMHO Rance will get two, with a likely plea down to one.

Viney won't get anything; it was forceful and aggressive, but there's no way that can be construed as striking.

Think many may be surprised.

He contacted the no-NO go area....the head. It was a truly dog act. NO ONE is giving it leeway, even known Toige sycophants.  I'm thinking 3-4 weeks with plea of 2 .

Next time we play them.....just runthrough the scum. Payback.

46 minutes ago, Mondê said:

What did Vince do? I didn't see it at the game, is he in trouble? 

Contact to the front of a Richmond players face when Vince was getting up after being crunched in a fair tackle. Hoping it fly's under the radar because he could get a week. 

1 hour ago, Peter Griffen said:

I think Carey was being told to go easy on Rance, he was definitely holding back on what he really thought imo 

I don't buy the out of character rubbish either, right after he did it he tried to play for a free kick of Jack Viney, he's just a weak dog.

I don't buy it either, there is a reason I have intensely disliked Rance for a long time.

 

look at the quarter time blue, the sod gives Bugg a very forceful shove when Bugg wasn't looking and goes to walk off, like it wasn't him - weak.

 

That said, he is like his team, look at them all tough and trying to bully Slalem when it was 4 or 5 versus one, but they back-pedalled big time when the likes of Viney, Dunn and Pedo got in their faces. As a team they are a classic case of being the school bully who empties their stomach whenever anyone stands up to them. They are a toothless mob of cowards these Tiges, only tough when they have the numerical advantage, they probably would be better off (as Bugg suggested) by selecting Cotchin's wife as she shows more fight than these weak cowards.

14 hours ago, Django said:

Pathetic from Rance, so unprofessional.

God I love Jack Viney. What a beast. That never would have happened a few years ago.

Yeah, cos he was only 11 yo.....oh wait he did get told off a few times for tackling too  hard in schoolbiy footy,,,,,,

Reviewed all incidents on SEN this morning, didn't even rate a mention

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-25/new-afl-tribunal-clause-might-cost-alex-rance-an-extra-week

According to this, the MRP can add weeks where an act has the potential to cause serious injury. New clause in 2016. Refers specifically to elbows.

With the current prevalence in wider society of king hits and cowardly striking, especially amongst young men, this is an important moment for the AFL. What Rance did was a dog act and the MRP should, IMO, use its powers to add weeks onto what would otherwise be a one week ban (intentional, head high, low impact = 1 week).

5 minutes ago, loges said:

Reviewed all incidents on SEN this morning, didn't even rate a mention

Vince?

I love that Maxy came in and made a big deal of the goal from Watts afterwards. 

6 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-25/new-afl-tribunal-clause-might-cost-alex-rance-an-extra-week

According to this, the MRP can add weeks where an act has the potential to cause serious injury. New clause in 2016. Refers specifically to elbows.

With the current prevalence in wider society of king hits and cowardly striking, especially amongst young men, this is an important moment for the AFL. What Rance did was a dog act and the MRP should, IMO, use its powers to add weeks onto what would otherwise be a one week ban (intentional, head high, low impact = 1 week).

Problem is that this is a test of integrity in a body that has none. 

Just now, monoccular said:

Problem is that this is a test of integrity in a body that has none. 

Agreed, and coupled with the incorrect and misplaced focus on the outcome of the incident (i.e. the damage caused) rather than the nature of the incident itself, I fully expect nothing more than a one week ban (with the words "after receiving a medical report from the Melbourne Football Club").

Just heard Slobbo say on SEN say that Richmond ran out with the younger brother of the young man from Diamond Creek who sadly lost his life to a coward punch last week.  

Then this from Rance....

 

2 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Just heard Slobbo say on SEN say that Richmond ran out with the younger brother of the young man from Diamond Creek who sadly lost his life to a coward punch last week.  

Then this from Rance....

 

The team must wear an older Brisbane Bears style uniform, saw that and wondered what that was doing out there, now I know.

Alex Rance - well worthy of wearing a yellow stripe on his back. The mark of a coward. 

None of his teammates tried to defend him. They knew what he had done. All they did was try to pull him away from Viney. 

Edited April 25, 20169 yr by Robot Devil

On 4/25/2016 at 1:24 PM, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Just heard Slobbo say on SEN say that Richmond ran out with the younger brother of the young man from Diamond Creek who sadly lost his life to a coward punch last week.  

Then this from Rance....

 

That's awful, Alex Rance should be ashamed. what a weak act.