Salem Suspended

[beelzebub 23,388]

3 minutes ago, Juicebox said:

I hear what you're saying. Gregg Popovic sprung to mind whilst I was writing my post. Of any sport, anywhere in the world, he is arguably the greatest coach of all time. Never one to shy away from giving his 2cents worth in a not so friendly manner.

 

Would Clarkson be even more respected had he of been a little less outspoken over the years? Uhh, probably. But would he have still been as successful?

Clarko is pretty well respected by his peers, by his club, his players and revered by the members 72, 552 of them ( currently )

He doesnt suffer fools ( nor do I ) and I seriously doubt he would give a stuff what they do or dont think about him.

JB...your good self alludes to speaking via winning.  2008 2013 2014 2015   I hear ya  loud and clear !!

[Lucifers Hero 40,489]

5 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

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 has seen the light!  No rule changes.  Sensibly enforcing the rules that are in place.  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-23/illicit-hits-cop-punch-in-the-guts-from-afl    "Lethlean said the benefit of the doubt may have been given to the players in previous seasons as there was a reluctance to rub players out for low level offences".

But -

"He did not consider appealing the Ben Cunnington decision and sending it to the tribunal because he understood the rationale behind the MRP's decision... I don't think the MRP was prepared to make an example of Cunnington until we had a think about our views on this," Lethlean said ".  

Sorry, Lethlean its your job to be independent and to appeal when obvious errors have occurred. 

[Skuit 10,031]

2 minutes ago, Jara said:

Good luck thinking we'll ever see a MRP or the umpires in our favour. I'm constantly amazed by the number of people in the general community who dislike us and take pleasure in our misery. I can only assume it's a residual dislike from the days, long gone now, when we were the preferred team of the elites. These days the spivs are all sitting in the Hawthorn corporate box.

They think we're the establishment, which we are. Indeed, we're the fallen nobility, of course they revel in our humiliation. And while we're beholden to the government for our royal stipend, that government will naturally demonstrate their political authority on the sacrificial former privileged, rather than confront the united strength of the unruly masses. But we quietly build a new and fearful army, and we will soon rise up and crush the plebeians under a glorious new regime, with the ruling class in our court and eager to express its deference. Long live the MFC! And may Jesse have mercy on their souls when the mighty return.

[Juicebox 628]

30 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Clarko is pretty well respected by his peers, by his club, his players and revered by the members 72, 552 of them ( currently )

He doesnt suffer fools ( nor do I ) and I seriously doubt he would give a stuff what they do or dont think about him.

JB...your good self alludes to speaking via winning.  2008 2013 2014 2015   I hear ya  loud and clear !!

You've got me there BB.

Though there should be a gentlemens agreement about listing hawthorn premierships on demonland to prove a point. 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

4 hours ago, Akum said:

I saw the Richmond captain hit Viney in the head in a similar fashion to Salem, and start a melee, for which he was later cited. He actually got a free kick for it, which led to a goal. Did that deter him from doing it again, or did it encourage him?

I think it would have encouraged him to go get a Tatts ticket.

And even more outrageous, he probably won 1st div.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

 Sorry, Lethlean its your job to be independent and to appeal when obvious errors have occurred. 

The "good blokes" rule overrides that. And all the MRP members are "good blokes".

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

2 hours ago, Jara said:

Good luck thinking we'll ever see a MRP or the umpires in our favour. I'm constantly amazed by the number of people in the general community who dislike us and take pleasure in our misery. I can only assume it's a residual dislike from the days, long gone now, when we were the preferred team of the elites. These days the spivs are all sitting in the Hawthorn corporate box.

Big deal. It all counts for nothing in the end, and there's only way to deal with it in any event -- win matches.

(One day we may get around to doing that.)

[daisycutter 29,805]

how does a very recently retired player like bartell get on the mrp when he has so many 'best mates'. still playing?

[monoccular 17,607]

20 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

 

13 hours ago, Is Dom Is Good said:

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!

 

10 hours ago, Akum said:

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.

 

8 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

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

 

Sorry - I hav just about had enough of this club's defeatist, weak kneed attitude. Was as p155

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Lethlean has seen the light!  No rule changes.  Sensibly enforcing the rules that are in place.  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-23/illicit-hits-cop-punch-in-the-guts-from-afl    "Lethlean said the benefit of the doubt may have been given to the players in previous seasons as there was a reluctance to rub players out for low level offences".

But -

"He did not consider appealing the Ben Cunnington decision and sending it to the tribunal because he understood the rationale behind the MRP's decision... I don't think the MRP was prepared to make an example of Cunnington until we had a think about our views on this," Lethlean said ".  

Sorry, Lethlean its your job to be independent and to appeal when obvious errors have occurred. 

Gil's henchmen never make a decision without a "process" i.e. obfuscation.   Gil is all over the place saying that gut punches are unacceptable, except he is too gutless to actually do anything about the one that got away....it would "give the appearance" that he didn't trust his own appointees, and that would be "a bad look" and "tarnish his image".  P155weak person.

[Skuit 10,031]

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

how does a very recently retired player like bartell get on the mrp when he has so many 'best mates'. still playing?

This is a very good question and one I asked at the time of his appointment. Indeed, why are any ex-players adjudicating on procedural and legal matters? Because they know what the game is like and can add some common sense = subjective outcomes.

[steve_f 40]

will give him more time to work on his PhD dissertation. A real smart guy.

Frost should similarly supported for giving away that free.

[Akum 2,660]

9 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Lethlean has seen the light!  No rule changes.  Sensibly enforcing the rules that are in place.  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-23/illicit-hits-cop-punch-in-the-guts-from-afl    "Lethlean said the benefit of the doubt may have been given to the players in previous seasons as there was a reluctance to rub players out for low level offences".

But -

"He did not consider appealing the Ben Cunnington decision and sending it to the tribunal because he understood the rationale behind the MRP's decision... I don't think the MRP was prepared to make an example of Cunnington until we had a think about our views on this," Lethlean said ".  

Sorry, Lethlean its your job to be independent and to appeal when obvious errors have occurred. 

Lethlean is too gutless to do anything because if he did, Brad Scott would be all over the media whinging about it, North would saturate the media with current and ex-players and legal opinions and god knows what else. And that's the AFL's greatest fear - bad publicity!

Nobody at the AFL has the strength of character to do what's right if they think there's the slightest possibility of bad publicity. They've demonstrated that again and again, and the above quotation exemplifies it. And (as Brad Scott fully understands and knows he can exploit it) in that sort of weak-character environment, it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease.

One thing I can guarantee - if it was one of our players in Cunnington's position, Lethlean would have had him suspended by now. Because he knows that Melbourne Football Club will always buckle under and never raise a peep.

[beelzebub 23,388]

We're a soft target.

In a way it's very much our own doing.

I'm sick of it. It's all very well suggesting that there's a 'proper' way of dealing with it but that plainly naive. The World works by the movers and shakers.

The meak dont get the world, they just get whatever no one actually wants...the dregs.

Clever politicians don't often say much, bur they cut to the quick and leave nobody uncertain about what's meant.

Our club has no Statesmen at the top. Might be cluey astute business folk but no sense of occasion nor stature.

Often those that do nothing, get trodden on.

[Red and Bluebeard 2,101]

13 hours ago, daisycutter said:

how does a very recently retired player like bartell get on the mrp when he has so many 'best mates'. still playing?

Indeed. In fact why are there any ex-players on it at all? All will carry some baggage and can't be reasonably expected to be unbiased when it comes to ex-teammates or someone from one of their old clubs. Ex-players aren't always the sharpest tools in the shed anyway. Given the players are professional, it seems reasonable to expect all officials, including umpires and MRP members, to be similarly professional. I know, too much to expect from the AFL, but anyway ...