Tommy Bugg on report

[Jara 1,153]

5 minutes ago, nutbean said:

This is exactly my thoughts. It is not the length of the suspensions that we have suffered this year that irks me. It is the gross inconsistency when comparing these suspensions with other cases that have gone before the MRP and the Tribunal. Houli and Bugg incidents fall into the same categorisation for mine  and what applied to one should have applied to the other.

Yep, I agree - it's the inconsistency that bugs (no pun in..) me.

 

Cards always seem to fall against us.

 

I only hope Bugg can take the opportunity to repay the club when the opportunity arises. Use the anger and shame to energise his game.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Bugg's door stop interview http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2017-07-04/statement-tomas-bugg

He handled himself exceptionally well.  Very genuine.  Managed to side step media questions that would attract more contentious headlines, like: was 6 weeks fair, impact of this on his career.

I noticed Mahoney wasn't in the frame.  The club clearly decided that he had to man up and publicly take full responsibility for the consequences.

But he isn't on his own - Jones said Bugg messed up but he is one of us and we will get around him and support him. 

Maybe this event will be what 'maketh the man'. 

I just watched this. He strikes me as a quality individual who has genuine remorse and who is absolutely standing up for his actions. In short, he's not shirking this at all. Not remotely.

Really glad the club recruited this bloke. Hope he trains the house down over the next 6 weeks and immediately makes a positive impact upon his return.

 

 

 

 

[poita 3,902]

I can't believe some of you people are trying to justify what Bugg did and paint him as some kind of hero. 

It was a disgraceful act, and he is fortunate to get away with a six week penalty. If his AFL career continues into next season, he is doubly lucky.

I have no sympathy or tolerance for any player from any team who strikes an opponent to the head. The sooner these all too common actions are eradicated from the game, the better.

[Jaded No More 68,921]

12 hours ago, Deeoldfart said:

Prima facie, I thought thought Bugg deserved 5 or 6 weeks for his hit on Mills, but I definitely don't think it warranted 2 weeks more than Houli.  Another case of Melbourne being made an example of, I reckon.

Nothing to do with Melbourne. It's a case of Bugg doing this literally 4 days after Houli got done for 4 weeks. The stupidity beggars belief.

The AFL want to stamp this out, and rightly so. 

Bugg getting 6 might be 'unfair', but it is the only thing the AFL can do to really deter players from hitting other players.

[wisedog 352]

I have to admit there's something strangely likeable about Bugg. I gather in these comments, even before this incident some posters see him as representing a kind of culture shift. Obviously, no one wants to see a repeat of what occurred on Friday.

It was ugly. I think the incident deserved for 4 - 6 weeks. I'm not entirely convinced he was aiming for Mill's head, but not even Bugg has said anything to the contrary.

What I don't like is the the cliche-riddled sanctimony from past players, even those with a record of committing similar acts. They then try to conflate this incident with a wider 'culture issue' which they raise in the same breath as Oliver's 'dive'. In truth, the culture at Melbourne hasn't been this healthy for 10 years.

I think there is a willingness in some sections of the media to keep us down, which is often evident in the in-game commentary (particularly BT). We probably are being too defensive, but I think we have been down for so long, some of us are afraid this media gang attack, will send our players back into their shells and we'll stop playing with confidence and flare.

Edited July 4, 2017 by wisedog

[jnrmac 20,089]

13 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Why the hell did we use this Findlay guy? Didn't he not get Viney off a few years back?
 

Bugg might not be a star but he's an MFC player and on that basis we should've done the best we could to get him the lightest punishment. In my mind that means hiring a decent QC who will present all of the evidence.

All I heard was that Bugg had pled guilty, apologised and was remorseful.

Nothing about:

- No weeks suspended in 94 games
- Mills started it
- Boxing expert Danny Green's comments about the force and intent of the punch
- No intent to cause injury

This was a 4 week suspension that became 6 weeks because it was Friday night footy and the expendable Tomas Bugg and I'm disappointed our club that rolled with that. 
 

This

[jnrmac 20,089]

17 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Nothing to do with Melbourne. It's a case of Bugg doing this literally 4 days after Houli got done for 4 weeks. The stupidity beggars belief.

The AFL want to stamp this out, and rightly so. 

Bugg getting 6 might be 'unfair', but it is the only thing the AFL can do to really deter players from hitting other players.

Spare us the sanctimony

[Lucifers Hero 39,819]

I would like to set aside the on-field acts and their penalties and just look at the behaviours of the 3 players in the aftermath: 

Houli:

• Apologised on the field to Carlton leaders and later to Lamb. 
• As far as I recall he did not front the media.
• His club called in people from high places to help mitigate the penalties.
• His lawyer played the racial abuse card during the Tribunal
• No one from his club apologies to their counterparts at the Club and simply ignored it.
• No after Tribunal/Appeal interview by Houli.

Bugg:

• Apologised on field to Mills
• Apologised immediately after the game and immediately faced the media and took responsibility for action
• Coach and Leaders personally apologised to their Sydney counterparts
• Our captain came out and condemned the action.
• Did not call in friends from high places. 
• Manfully and courageously fronted the media immediately after the Tribunal finding and took responsibility for the consequences.

Fahour:

• As far as I can tell no apology to Saddington until after the sh**t hit the fan in the media.
• Played the 'pity' card with faux tears after the event
• Is hiding behind the apron strings of the AFL.

Regardless of what people think of the 3 events and the penalties, I hope all can agree our club has handled this with dignity and maturity.  Very proud of mfc for their handling of this.  They are setting an example for our team to learn what constitutes humility and respect.  Can't say the same for Rich or the AFL.

[jnrmac 20,089]

36 minutes ago, poita said:

I can't believe some of you people are trying to justify what Bugg did and paint him as some kind of hero. 

It was a disgraceful act, and he is fortunate to get away with a six week penalty. If his AFL career continues into next season, he is doubly lucky.

I have no sympathy or tolerance for any player from any team who strikes an opponent to the head. The sooner these all too common actions are eradicated from the game, the better.

Are you in a reality distortion field?

Who is painting Bugg as a hero? Nearly everyone says he was incredibly stupid for what he did.

[jnrmac 20,089]

1 hour ago, Jara said:

Yep, I agree - it's the inconsistency that bugs (no pun in..) me.

Cards always seem to fall against us.

I only hope Bugg can take the opportunity to repay the club when the opportunity arises. Use the anger and shame to energise his game.

We are usually weak when it comes to fronting the tribunal and mounting a defence based on precedence and other factors. The only case that comes to memory where we have stood up is the Viney appeal. 

[jnrmac 20,089]

12 hours ago, xarronn said:

They get a defence when they claim to be innocent. Bugg didn't make any such claim. Any claims for mitigation would have made no difference to the result given the visible evidence and outcome of the punch. He and the club decided to take whatever was given and get on with the rest of the season. 

Everything I heard from player, captain, coach and club was spot on. What some posters on here wanted was not what Bugg or the club wanted.

I'm proud of all of them, and I'm proud of my club!

Joining the club of people making things up here? Really? 

It is clear that Houli knocked Jed Lamb out. Did Bugg do that? No. Visible evidence and outcome 4 weeks. Bugg 6 weeks.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

57 minutes ago, poita said:

I can't believe some of you people are trying to justify what Bugg did and paint him as some kind of hero. 

It was a disgraceful act, and he is fortunate to get away with a six week penalty. If his AFL career continues into next season, he is doubly lucky.

I have no sympathy or tolerance for any player from any team who strikes an opponent to the head. The sooner these all too common actions are eradicated from the game, the better.

I have not read one comment here in which a poster has tried to 'justify' what Bugg did.

 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,782]

I'm not a great fan of Bugg as a player. But I do hope he gets a chance to play at least 6 more games. The symmetry of getting to the 100 game milestone which is denied him (by his own actions) over the next 6 weeks adds to the story. I hope he returns, and when he does, he lets his football do the talking. (Over the next 6 weeks, I hope he maintains his fitness and works on his skills, particularly his goal-kicking).

Personally, I think the 6 week penalty was about right. Comparisons with Barry Hall's penalty for hitting Staker miss the point. Hall should have been suspended for double what he received. I'm not commenting on whether Houli should have received a longer penalty, because I haven't seen what he did.

 

[Vogon Poetry 2,095]

I think the MFC response, and Bugg's, has been absolutely correct and I admire them for it.

There is no sensible defence of Bugg's hit.  The provocation by football standards is non existent, the response totally inappropriate and disproportionate the the image of Mills being KO'd alarming. 

He was wrong and he represents us, the MFC.  To defend him would be wrong, to use weasle words to mitigate punishment distasteful.  This is the era of community education of the unacceptable nature of violence, domestic violence and one punch death.  To support Buggs actions in any way or try and mitigate or excuse them would be utterly wrong.

Jackson, Roos, Mahoney and Goodwin are building a culture and brand to take this football club to where we all want it to go.  Bugg's actions have significantly hurt that brand and the club's response has to be to minimise that damage.  They've done that.

Be angry all you like at the inconsistency of the tribunal.  Really does it matter if Bugg got 4 weeks or 6 weeks?  Not to me. The bigger issue is we have, as a Club, made a statement that what he did was totally unacceptable and we will take full responsibility for it and behave accordingly.

I think Bugg is gone.  Those in outrage are now making him out to be a much better footballer than he is.  He's ordinary and nowhere near my best 22 with a full and fit list.  He's an employee who has acted contrary to our interest and doesn't offer much in return.  I doubt he'll play for us again.  Like the AFL and Fahour we have a similar decision with Bugg.  And just to clarify, I'm not saying Bugg is anywhere near the ugliness of Fahour, but it's the same genre and it's a very ugly genre.

[Sir Why You Little 37,043]

5 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

I think the MFC response, and Bugg's, has been absolutely correct and I admire them for it.

There is no sensible defence of Bugg's hit.  The provocation by football standards is non existent, the response totally inappropriate and disproportionate the the image of Mills being KO'd alarming. 

He was wrong and he represents us, the MFC.  To defend him would be wrong, to use weasle words to mitigate punishment distasteful.  This is the era of community education of the unacceptable nature of violence, domestic violence and one punch death.  To support Buggs actions in any way or try and mitigate or excuse them would be utterly wrong.

Jackson, Roos, Mahoney and Goodwin are building a culture and brand to take this football club to where we all want it to go.  Bugg's actions have significantly hurt that brand and the club's response has to be to minimise that damage.  They've done that.

Be angry all you like at the inconsistency of the tribunal.  Really does it matter if Bugg got 4 weeks or 6 weeks?  Not to me. The bigger issue is we have, as a Club, made a statement that what he did was totally unacceptable and we will take full responsibility for it and behave accordingly.

I think Bugg is gone.  Those in outrage are now making him out to be a much better footballer than he is.  He's ordinary and nowhere near my best 22 with a full and fit list.  He's an employee who has acted contrary to our interest and doesn't offer much in return.  I doubt he'll play for us again.  Like the AFL and Fahour we have a similar decision with Bugg.  And just to clarify, I'm not saying Bugg is anywhere near the ugliness of Fahour, but it's the same genre and it's a very ugly genre.

I hope Bugg goes on to play 100 games for the club, puts a medallion around his neck.

He deserved 4 and got 6.

Next week there will be another controversy and Slobbo will have more sh!t to write.

[leave it to deever 17,511]

40 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I hope Bugg goes on to play 100 games for the club, puts a medallion around his neck.

He deserved 4 and got 6.

Next week there will be another controversy and Slobbo will have more sh!t to write.

Hope so too. Probably deserved 5 IMO .

I reckon he gives his all on the field. Did Slobbo ever play?

Edited July 5, 2017 by leave it to deever

[Vagg 2,439]

7 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Hope so too. Probably deserved 5 IMO .

I reckon he gives his all on the field. Did Slobbo ever play?

In fairness to Mark Robinson, he did state on AFL 360 last night that he thought the penalty should have been only 4 weeks...

[sue 9,107]

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

Be angry all you like at the inconsistency of the tribunal.  Really does it matter if Bugg got 4 weeks or 6 weeks?  Not to me.

For me the anger is not whether Bugg deserved 4, 6 or 8 weeks.  It is the cases where players get off completely or get a slap on the wrist.  If the AFL is serious of cutting out hits to the head they should apply it rigourously. They don't. 

[bluey 1,103]

Got to love the  Juddy red card article, the convicted eye gouger, and pressure point tactition trying to exagerate himself into history as an all round good bloke.

[nutbean 8,838]

3 hours ago, Jaded said:

Nothing to do with Melbourne. It's a case of Bugg doing this literally 4 days after Houli got done for 4 weeks. The stupidity beggars belief.

The AFL want to stamp this out, and rightly so. 

Bugg getting 6 might be 'unfair', but it is the only thing the AFL can do to really deter players from hitting other players.

Agree with your first two paragraphs and vehemently disagree with the last paragraph.

If you want to lift penalties for striking to the head then all well and good but you do not do it "by example". 

The incident was no better or worse than Houli's and maybe Houli gets one week less for his clean skin record over so many years. But with Bugg you give him a comparable punishment and then and only then the AFL state  - we are lifting the penalties. 

The tribunal just looks amateurish due to their inconsistency and Bugg can feel aggrieved, not because he got a hefty penalty which he deserved, but because the penalty does not square away with other similar actions.

[nutbean 8,838]

2 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

 

Be angry all you like at the inconsistency of the tribunal.  Really does it matter if Bugg got 4 weeks or 6 weeks?  Not to me. The bigger issue is we have, as a Club, made a statement that what he did was totally unacceptable and we will take full responsibility for it and behave accordingly.

 

It does matter to me because whilst it may not matter in this instance, what if it was Jones, Oliver or Gawn and we were playing finals and it meant the difference between being available for a Grand Final or not ( I wish !!!). 

You call out major inconsistencies where you see them as there will be times when these inconsistencies do matter.

[Vogon Poetry 2,095]

17 minutes ago, sue said:

For me the anger is not whether Bugg deserved 4, 6 or 8 weeks.  It is the cases where players get off completely or get a slap on the wrist.  If the AFL is serious of cutting out hits to the head they should apply it rigourously. They don't. 

My anger is that Bugg put us in this position and my interest is the Club handling it as well as they can which I think they have.

MRP inconsistency has been around for ever and won't be solved.

 

[Vogon Poetry 2,095]

4 minutes ago, nutbean said:

It does matter to me because whilst it may not matter in this instance, what if it was Jones, Oliver or Gawn and we were playing finals and it meant the difference between being available for a Grand Final or not ( I wish !!!). 

You call out major inconsistencies where you see them as there will be times when these inconsistencies do matter.

I'll call Viney last week very lucky when compared to the Ziebell incident.  You win some and lose some. 

I stated early that I thought Bugg should get 4 but it's garnish to the bigger issue.

[nutbean 8,838]

Just now, Vogon Poetry said:

I'll call Viney last week very lucky when compared to the Ziebell incident.  You win some and lose some. 

I stated early that I thought Bugg should get 4 but it's garnish to the bigger issue.

Agreed and that is why the MRP is a laughing stock.

I agree that protecting the head is the bigger issue but it does not mean that penalty inconsistencies is not an issue as well.

 

[sue 9,107]

19 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

 

MRP inconsistency has been around for ever and won't be solved.

 

That is a defeatist position.  What about some major reform of the MRP and tribunal.  Currently it is like a murder trial in which the jury is composed of hit-men.