It was a good hit and put Mills out for the game, leaving them one man down.  

Unfortunately we didnt take advantage, and lost Viney anyway.

It is laughable that anyone should apologise for the incident.  Mills is soft as butter and a slight breeze would knock him over.

Do it again next time, Buggy.

Was no Houli.  Was always going to get 6.  Entitled to a defense...he pleaded guilty.  Perhaps a conversation about mitigation, but suggest the club simply want to see the back of this, and are ok with Bugg getting a whack.  Therefore Bugg was essentially on his own.

22 minutes ago, Demon77 said:

Lewis on 360 also stated that our leaders rang Mills and Kennedy. 

What next...buy them all sherbets !!

Melbourne the SOCIABLE club

We're not hard to play against.

 

44 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Moronic. Even murderers get a defence.

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!

5 minutes 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!

Proud of most of them, like all teams there are few less than wonderful people involved.

1 hour ago, PaulRB said:

Bugg made a costly error of judgement.

There's no room in professional sport for assaulting another player in this way. If he'd done that outside the stadium he'd be charged with assault. 

Six weeks for assaulting someone in your workplace is actually grossly inadequate. Only in the delusional bubble that is the AFL can we think 6 weeks for a king hit behind play is unfair. 

It was more of a tap than a king hit and both players were tussling. I watched the footage again and Bugg appeared genuinely surprised when Mills went down. It was silly and but he has demonstrated genuine remorse, accepted responsibility making no excuses and will miss the next 6 weeks.

Bachir Houli by comparison pleaded not guilty and used his social standing to plead for a reduced sentence and apologised by text message.

In my view Bugg has shown more character than Houli who is meant to be a leader in his community.

this is the same tribunal that gave houli 2 weeks (yes 2) and bugg 6 weeks just 7 days apart

where is the consistency, both acts were deemed intentional, high and high impact. houli actually knocked his guy unconscious and used a more dangerous round arm (albeit in reverse) to the more dangerous side of the head with greater force.

i would grade both acts essentially similar and deserving of the same punishment whether it be x weeks or y weeks. 

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

this is the same tribunal that gave houli 2 weeks (yes 2) and bugg 6 weeks just 7 days apart

where is the consistency, both acts were deemed intentional, high and high impact. houli actually knocked his guy unconscious and used a more dangerous round arm (albeit in reverse) to the more dangerous side of the head with greater force.

i would grade both acts essentially similar and deserving of the same punishment whether it be x weeks or y weeks. 

I guess that proves Hoult got off with a light sentence dc.

Not that anyone thought otherwise.

What annoys me most out of all of this is that it is pure luck that Schofield didn't do the same amount of damage that Bugg did, yet Oliver is the villain.

If the AFL actually clamped down on all these punches the these incidents wouldn't happen.

Just now, Clint Bizkit said:

What annoys me most out of all of this is that it is pure luck that Schofield didn't do the same amount of damage that Bugg did, yet Oliver is the villain.

If the AFL actually clamped down on all these punches the these incidents wouldn't happen.

Not sure they would never happen CB but there would certainly be a lot less.

I'd prefer the tribunal be consistently harsh on hits to the head, it's got to be removed from the game at AFL level, to provide leadership and example to players umps and tribunals at all levels.

Its a sad blemish on the game, and if not checked will inevitably result in tragedy and the law getting involved.

The attack on "any part of the head region bar" has never been raised any higher than what it will be for the rest of this year, at least. Never will the head be more scrutinized, protected or loved.

Or until we get, with all the recent and continuing earth shattering c"ups by any organisation this side of Saint Petersburg (further north than Moscow), a replacement board of mentally capable executives  installed into  AFL Headquarters.

6 minutes ago, willmoy said:

The attack on "any part of the head region bar" has never been raised any higher than what it will be for the rest of this year, at least. Never will the head be more scrutinized, protected or loved.

Or until we get, with all the recent and continuing earth shattering c"ups by any organisation this side of Saint Petersburg (further north than Moscow), a replacement board of mentally capable executives  installed into  AFL Headquarters.

Replacement of the old boys club is a decade over due. But don't hold your breath willmoy.

59 minutes 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. 
 

And no character references from the PM. Or the Queen. Or someone else of little relevance to the incident at all.

 

I think the club could have said more in mitigation even if it was going to make no difference to the penalty.  It is significant that Bugg hasn't been charged in 94 matches and if there was provocation and lack of intent it is unjust to Bugg's reputation not to mention that. 

I don't mind him being rubbed out.  I do mind the inconsistency of the MRP and the media freanzy.   The head should be sacrosanct especially if it is intentional.  Instead we get a frenzy about Clarrie diving and random interpretations from the MRP with a strong element of who you are not what you did.

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

The QC lining up on the weekend ??

Ffs thats all his job is here...club squibbing...again. They ALWAYS squib.

Can't agree on this Bub. The penaltys been doled out. The rats slink back to the shadows to await the next target. The dees get back to business. What we can't have is to drag this sorry business out.

4 hours ago, xarronn said:

In no way am I saying it is the same as a punch to the head or even a punch to the body, but when you say unprovoked violence, - it happens all the time on the field. 

Dees2014, not many stuck up for Bugg on the following occasions, do you class these incidents as unprovoked violence?

Can you remember Easton Wood attacking Bugg before the game even started a couple of weeks ago? No action taken, no question to answer.

Later he was attacked again which resulted in a free kick in front of goals and he came up with scratches and bleeding from the head.

 It seems we do accept unprovoked violence on the football field. In fact there was a distinct sense that many people saw it as entertaining and deserved because Bugg had put up a message on Facebook.

The Farhour incident, seems to have heightened the focus on Bugg as well.

 

I'm not picking on Bugg. I say all violence, particularly targeted at the head,  should be not only penalised, but also subject to tribunal scrutiny. As Old Dee says, two wrongs don't make a right.

22  WHITE LINE fever pills for private distribution behind the sheds.....                    Sold...

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

this is the same tribunal that gave houli 2 weeks (yes 2) and bugg 6 weeks just 7 days apart

where is the consistency, both acts were deemed intentional, high and high impact. houli actually knocked his guy unconscious and used a more dangerous round arm (albeit in reverse) to the more dangerous side of the head with greater force.

i would grade both acts essentially similar and deserving of the same punishment whether it be x weeks or y weeks. 

I may be mistaken, but I think I heard/read somewhere during the previous week that the members of the tribunal from the Houli case were all replaced for this week, and at least one of the replacements was a Sydney person ?

8 minutes ago, JTR said:

I may be mistaken, but I think I heard/read somewhere during the previous week that the members of the tribunal from the Houli case were all replaced for this week, and at least one of the replacements was a Sydney person ?

Neitz was on the panel last week, apparently, but not this week.  Can't remember who, but one of the tribunal members was also on Houli's panel.

18 minutes ago, JTR said:

I may be mistaken, but I think I heard/read somewhere during the previous week that the members of the tribunal from the Houli case were all replaced for this week, and at least one of the replacements was a Sydney person ?

that may be jtr, but i was meaning the same body (i.e. distinct from the mrp or the appeals board).

part of their job you would assume would be to dispense justice with consistency applying the same rules of judgement and punishment

(assuming that in the 7 days between sitting the rules of judgement and sentencing didn't change)

Well I guess they took out character references...  

It would be fantastic if they were consistent but we've just seen over the course of a week two similar-ish incidents deemed to have a 4 week difference in the original penalty handed down.

Edited July 4, 20178 yr by JTR

1 hour ago, pineapple dee said:

Can't agree on this Bub. The penaltys been doled out. The rats slink back to the shadows to await the next target. The dees get back to business. What we can't have is to drag this sorry business out.

It neednt have been dragged out, it could have been contested in terms of the charge, veracity, etc etc. A decent effort ( such as other clubs appear capable of ). Result still on the night.

We have no stomach ( as a club ) for any of this.

When do we ever fight or try minimising ? Its hard to recall. So seldom. 

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'. 

Edited July 4, 20178 yr by Lucifer's Hero

11 hours ago, daisycutter said:

this is the same tribunal that gave houli 2 weeks (yes 2) and bugg 6 weeks just 7 days apart

where is the consistency, both acts were deemed intentional, high and high impact. houli actually knocked his guy unconscious and used a more dangerous round arm (albeit in reverse) to the more dangerous side of the head with greater force.

i would grade both acts essentially similar and deserving of the same punishment whether it be x weeks or y weeks. 

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.