2 hours ago, Sigil said:

Do you really not think the club is not talking to the proper authorities when they think decisions are completely stupid 

You know ..im not ever convinced they do. Do you know for a fact they do ?

If so...it gets us absolutely nowhere.

We're seen as weak as shlt by other clubs. We're seen as pushovers by ths AFL...or rather another boyz club with vested interests run by folk who favour certain clubs.

North completely outfoxed us. Call Scott and Co all the names but they've got it far better figured than us

No one takes us seriously. Ffs .. i don't !!

We play a mans game and send boys out without the mental preparedness.

Occasionally you get lucky and the cards fall well and you have an Adelaide game and feel all whoop'd de do... and then there's the rest of times.

But back to your question Sigil

I dont see the club doing sweet f all !!

And im a bit over it 

2 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

@Satyriconhome Is this something you can assist with? It's common knowledge you speak regularly with coaches and players, are you able to find out whether any action was taken by the club towards the umpires department?

What a club can do is ask politely for some clarification on certain rulings

I have seen umps at training a couple of times, so nobody can claim ignorance on the rules

I think the issue is the game is getting faster and faster and like the players the umpires become more fatigued physically and mentally quicker, and make stupid decisions

We have had the rub of the green in the past so we have to wear games like Sunday

Yes agree there were some terrible, baffling, what the? decisions but the game is over, move on

Bit like the MRP, if the decisions handed down baffle players turned commentators who have played the game, what hope have we got

Sorry Saty

..thats a bit too Neville Chamberlain for me 

12 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Sorry Saty

..thats a bit too Neville Chamberlain for me 

So what do you suggest?

I would assume the club will move on very quickly as it has to and let those commentators mentioned above drive the agenda, and journos reading forums such as this

As for Salem, like Vince, Hogan and Lewis before him, he wuz stoopid

At the game for a change and a long way off the action with North supporting mates. 

We were all amazed at the appalling umpires and opined that they had lost control. 

There  were so many incidents that the umpires let go that players from both sides had no restraints. Obvious free kicks were ignored. Most of the frees given were there but so inconsistently applied frustration of spectators and players was assured .

MRP should review the whole match but if appropriately rulings were applied North and Melbourne would have fewer players to select from and the umpires panel would be he same

What a complete and utter [censored] disgrace! I would expect a please explain from the league. WTF is going on here? I'm not one for whinging constantly to the AFL, but if this was Collingwood or Hawthorn, they'd be asking questions and they'd make damn sure it wouldn't happen again. At least put the umpires and the MRP on notice. It really is mindbogglingly biased. 

I have no problem with them targeting Oliver. We targeted Higgens, and Sloane last week. We gave them as much dirty niggle as they gave us. The Cunnington gut-punch should have been reversed, but so should have the Salem elbow. My problem is that decisions weren't being made based on merit, but some element of moral judgement.

And now that's carried over to the MRP. It's BS that they don't have the power to suspend a gut or throat punch. The MRP were of the opinion our players milked it. They wouldn't be in a position of being able to milk it if the opposition didn't take a hearty swing.

Why do we keep defending punching in our sport? It's not in the course of play, it's not an accident. And it's not footballing toughness. Never mind impact and all the other distractions. Take a swing and you're out. Full-stop. What other sport in the world can you get away with a full punch in plain view and escape sanction? Besides boxing. 

8 hours ago, fr_ap said:

I don't post here often, but the rabid mood on here is contagious. I am absolutely fuming about the MRP farce, and also this:

In all seriousness I would love to know what the club is doing about all of this. We have been scapegoated and taken advantage of. I am all for taking the high road but the time has come to ask serious questions of the AFL. 

I would say Karma will get them, but its BS and doesnt exist. Unfortunately we as a supporter base are well aware of that.

Does anyone have any AFL connections? This is [censored]. 

 

At the time of the incident I wondered if I had missed an elbow to the head or something like that.

Re-watching that confirms that it was one of the worst decisions of the day, and at such a crucial time and part of the ground.

Salem has eyes for the ball and the player just takes him out of the contest completely.

I really hope the club request a please explain from the AFL and wouldn't be against them coming out in the media to have a go at them.

Take a stand against this crap!

7 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

So what do you suggest?

I would assume the club will move on very quickly as it has to and let those commentators mentioned above drive the agenda, and journos reading forums such as this

As for Salem, like Vince, Hogan and Lewis before him, he wuz stoopid

You can't have read much of this thread then if you come up with that.

I'm affraid you , and i dont say this personally per se , only you often vocalise the clubs action, or lack of, typify what is wrong with Melbourne.

You assume the club does something. Where is any evidence to this effect ? The AFL is agenda driven. A bit like the umpiring it's all over the shop. No longer does it keep shop for the member clubs to whom it should be answering it now wags the dog.

Beasts like Gils Dills are swayed by few things but media scutiny ( as you hint ) is one. When you're given lip service , if that, by official chanels then, just as in politics , you play the game of third parties. That is you throw out 'word bombs' triggering off discussion and pressure . The AFL wont blink if we get annoyed but it will act if it thinks its darling reputation as doyen of sport and all things wonderful is being tarnished.

You see the AFL is all about them. Over time they have essentially gone rogue on the clubs.

Its time to pull them back into line.

The more astute clubs know how to play the game, in fact one tells us exactly that....and they do.

Just like the school yard. Bullies only flourish if you give them the power. Take it back and they kowtow.

Time for MELBOURNE to remind Gil and his useless mrp etc who's game this is. It's not Gil's.

You want respect. Stand up for yourself.

An aspect to what the club does/can do is exactly what the Kings of unsocial footy as well as othed no nonsense clubs  do, they contest, they push back. 

What this does is broadcast a clear message...pick on us and well see you at the house. Over time it puts  clowns like the mrp on notice that you better think twice. 

When was the last time the Dees ever wigged up and called anyone's bluff ? 

No issue with Salem getting a week, but how Higgins and Cunnington (and Thomson previously) escaped suspension serves to demonstrate the inconsistency in the application of rules.

That's what annoys everyone.

 

6 hours ago, Skuit said:

I have no problem with them targeting Oliver. We targeted Higgens, and Sloane last week. We gave them as much dirty niggle as they gave us. The Cunnington gut-punch should have been reversed, but so should have the Salem elbow. My problem is that decisions weren't being made based on merit, but some element of moral judgement.

And now that's carried over to the MRP. It's BS that they don't have the power to suspend a gut or throat punch. The MRP were of the opinion our players milked it. They wouldn't be in a position of being able to milk it if the opposition didn't take a hearty swing.

Why do we keep defending punching in our sport? It's not in the course of play, it's not an accident. And it's not footballing toughness. Never mind impact and all the other distractions. Take a swing and you're out. Full-stop. What other sport in the world can you get away with a full punch in plain view and escape sanction? Besides boxing. 

I reckon it all started with Nat Fyfe in his Brownlow year. The MRP turned themselves inside out trying to avoid suspending the guy who was the obvious Brownlow winner several weeks out from the end of the season. What would the AFL PR consultants (who virtually set the standards for the AFL) do if the eventual Brownlow winner got suspended multiple times like he should have been? The docile commentariat, who rely entirely on the AFL for their living, chose to ignore.

Since the success of getting away with not suspending Fyfe, we now have favoured players (most of whom play for wealthy or important or noisy clubs - Fyfe, Cotchin, Mummy, anybody who plays for Demetriou's old club) who cannot get suspended under any circumstances and will only get fined. But to uphold the charade that they're not being soft, they have to be hard on other players who will get suspended for relatively minor incidents.

I repeat, in most of the 120 years or so that Aussie Rules footy has been in existence, Cunnington & Higgins would have got suspended and Salem got off. This is now a game ruled by PR, and because we never make any noise on behalf of our players, we never threaten their sacred public image. We know our place.

Akum gets it ✓

29 minutes ago, Akum said:

I reckon it all started with Nat Fyfe in his Brownlow year. The MRP turned themselves inside out trying to avoid suspending the guy who was the obvious Brownlow winner several weeks out from the end of the season. What would the AFL PR consultants (who virtually set the standards for the AFL) do if the eventual Brownlow winner got suspended multiple times like he should have been? The docile commentariat, who rely entirely on the AFL for their living, chose to ignore.

Since the success of getting away with not suspending Fyfe, we now have favoured players (most of whom play for wealthy or important or noisy clubs - Fyfe, Cotchin, Mummy, anybody who plays for Demetriou's old club) who cannot get suspended under any circumstances and will only get fined. But to uphold the charade that they're not being soft, they have to be hard on other players who will get suspended for relatively minor incidents.

I repeat, in most of the 120 years or so that Aussie Rules footy has been in existence, Cunnington & Higgins would have got suspended and Salem got off. This is now a game ruled by PR, and because we never make any noise on behalf of our players, we never threaten their sacred public image. We know our place.

 

AFL/MRP has a sacred public image?

Don't know if making some noise would change their terrible reputation or make any difference to outcomes

8 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

So what do you suggest?

I would assume the club will move on very quickly as it has to and let those commentators mentioned above drive the agenda, and journos reading forums such as this

As for Salem, like Vince, Hogan and Lewis before him, he wuz stoopid

 

Agree but will you talk to Salem after Arsenal beat Everton 3-1 or will you mention that Arsenal missed the top 4 for the first time in 20 years?

It's easy to get frustrated by the umpiring when we lose and I admit I've felt like venting like the rest of us. This is especiallywhen we found it difficult to get clean entry into our forward half/50 and poorumpiring decisions at critical stages halted our momentum.  I'm happy Goody doesn't let the umpiring become a distraction from what we are building and it is irrelevant to our season whether players from other clubs get suspended, only whether our own do.  I say let the coaching and player group work on addressing what it can control, which is the 1.5 quarters that North dominated us, so that we can start to win these close contests against less talented/more experienced sides.

I'll back the club either way on whether the will challenge the Salem suspension noting that's we probably don't have grounds to have it overturned and it's better for us that Salem misses 1 week rather than 2.

This thread is ostensibly about Salem.

Well when we play the return fixture at their island abode i fervently hope that we not only take a few larger types , I hope we take a no steps back attitude.  im expecting we seek to exact revenge , to restore some honour. As we ARE Demon orientated I want that visit to not only record a win but to turn that venue into a very unhappy memory for Scott's tots. Turn it into Salem's Lot.

Do a Crows job on them.. Destroy them. Quite frankly i want to do a number on them. 

Dumb by Salem, but I would be arguing insufficient force.

11 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

It's actually impossible to work out how any umpire could conceivably award a free kick to the North player in that.

It's insane.

So, so bad.

Up there with the DOOB against Hibberd.

The DOOB against Hibberd could be excused if the ump was blindsided, but the one closest wasn't and call came from the ump miles away, the close ump should have over ruled.

The ump has no excuse in the Salem one. Baffling in its stupidity. 

4 minutes ago, Chris said:

The DOOB against Hibberd could be excused if the ump was blindsided, but the one closest wasn't and call came from the ump miles away, the close ump should have over ruled.

The ump has no excuse in the Salem one. Baffling in its stupidity. 

you know...a conspiracist type might think there was more to all of this 

10 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

What a club can do is ask politely for some clarification on certain rulings

I have seen umps at training a couple of times, so nobody can claim ignorance on the rules

I think the issue is the game is getting faster and faster and like the players the umpires become more fatigued physically and mentally quicker, and make stupid decisions

We have had the rub of the green in the past so we have to wear games like Sunday

Yes agree there were some terrible, baffling, what the? decisions but the game is over, move on

Bit like the MRP, if the decisions handed down baffle players turned commentators who have played the game, what hope have we got

And Saty, my greatest fear is that you have nailed the club's attitude spot-on.

We have to accept the umpiring, we have to accept the targeting of our young players, we have to accept that the umpires won't protect them, we have to accept the crazy-lopsided MRP decisions that have been going against this club since Trengove on Dangerfield. Or maybe since we nailed the MRP with Viney on Lynch.

But there are probably at least a dozen clubs who wouldn't accept all that without saying or doing something to protect their players.

So we lose the game, the fight, the court case and the PR battle, all without a squeak.

 

Goody should have been talking up our case, like Scott did his. Lots of things he could have raised: Oliver's punch in the throat, Vince's technicolour yawn. Instead he says - what? - we're "developing".  Been a bloody long development. Eleven years, last time I looked.   

Edited May 22, 20178 yr by Jara

Just now, Jara said:

So we lose the game, the fight, the court case and the PR battle, all without a squeak.

 

Goody should have been talking up our case like Scott did. Lots of things he could have raised: Oliver's punch in the throat, Vince's technicolour yawn. Instead he says - what? - we're "developing".  Been a bloody long development. Eleven years, last time I looked.   

Keep looking !! 

Am not impressed by Melbourne's silence at all..  In footy parlance...we're squibbing it !!   ( again )

I was just listening to SEN and apparently Lethlean goes to the MRP meetings to hear what they are going to do. No wonder he never appeals a decision.

That is a blatant abuse of the supposed MRP independence.  After all, Leathlean represents the AFL and the AFL appoint the MRP members. 

Now he wants to change the rules.  The rules are fine!  Its the interpretation of intent, impact, in play, risk of injury etc are the problem.

Lethlean should stay out of the MRP process altogether.

Salem has accepted the penalty, there's one forced change.