Bernie Vince on report

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

It's two weeks because of his existing bad record.

Why is anyone surprised? 

He's an idiot who has let his team mates and club down yet again. How many more times?

Who gives a fark about what other players are getting. None of them have the record that Vince has.

Edited July 17, 2017 by stevethemanjordan

[Diamond_Jim 11,967]

8 minutes ago, sue said:

on that logic, may as well appeal and have him rubbed out for all 3.

not really ... against GWS we should be at full strength (save for Jones) and many of the players coming back should be match fit

[DistrACTION Jackson 6,511]

We've got to challenge it.

If Schofield got off for his then we just have to.

We will roll over again though.

[JTR 2,660]

Another thing...

When it is clear the MRP are mindless buffoons who make decisions on the fly in line with the current media ageda, why the **** is so much commentary allowed before the MRP makes it decision, effectively throwing the player under the bus?

If commentary about a current case in the court of law is avoided so as not to influence the jury, then why are the media let loose like rabid dogs to effectively protect and condemn as they see fit?

[Jaded No More 58,825]

Haven't seen any footy this weekend and haven't seen the Bernie incidents, but all I can say is pathetic from Vince. You are a leader and we are struggling with injuries. What the hell are you thinking?

Dumb, selfish, not good enough. 

[SFebes 4,694]

4 minutes ago, sue said:

If that's true, I must revise my accusation that the MRP is insane.  It is totally corrupt.  The AFL sickens me.  Let me count the ways...

I got howled down by some clown last week for saying the league is corrupt, watch any umpiring each week how they try to even up games to make the league look like a success and then this stupid changing of the goal posts with MRP. Its a rort.

"Best Season Ever" they say.......

[JV7 2,339]

Why are people so pi$$ed off with the MRP ? He elbowed a bloke in the jaw, forget other incidents. Bernie is a d!ckhead, how many times does he want to do this stupid [censored] ? It's about he's 4 suspension in 18 months. I'm not to fussed anyway, once Salems back Vince should be gone 

Edited July 17, 2017 by JV7

[SFebes 4,694]

2 minutes ago, JV7 said:

Why are people so pi$$ed off with the MRP ? He elbowed a bloke in the jaw, forget other incidents. Bernie is a d!ckhead, how many times does he want to do this stupid [censored] ? It's about he's 4 suspension in 18 months. I'm not to fussed anyway, once Salems back Vince should be gone 

And Schofield didn't elbow Oliver in the jaw? And I don't care that Vince has been suspended, hes there to lead, hes a clown. But rules don't add up

Edited July 17, 2017 by SFebey

[brendan 3,400]

Load up on dusty he is clearly a Monty for the Brownlow 

[JV7 2,339]

Just now, SFebey said:

And Schofield didn't elbow Oliver in the jaw?

Vinces was more clear and direct.. Schofields was glancing at best

[Garbo 1,347]

The hit was graded as intentional conduct with low impact to the head. I don't like that he won't be playing but I don't see how anyone could argue with a straight face that any of these are not the case.

No one should be raising the elbow as the run past so that's the intentional and he plainly got him to the head, the grading of low impact certainly isn't out of line with others this year

 

 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Garbo

[mrtwister 650]

17 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Is there any footage of it?

I have a link to the AFL mrp preview from a post in this thread earlier today CB. It's right at the end. 

Edited July 17, 2017 by mrtwister

[Chris 2,892]

23 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

It would be pretty hard to argue that his elbow was "insufficient force".

Just a dumb thing to do.

Had no greater impact than Schofields. I would actually argue a slight impact form the point of the elbow to the tip of jaw has greater impact than a glancing forearm across the cheek.

[Willmoy1947 3,810]

Some people might suggest that the MRP are a hypocritical bunch of overrated has beens who are short of a quid, and think that the best way to get some is to grease their way through an earner by doing what they are told by the AFL and herald scum.Similar to a Nth Korean Court!!! 

[sue 8,472]

7 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

not really ... against GWS we should be at full strength (save for Jones) and many of the players coming back should be match fit

Alternatively you could argue that we have a much better chance of beating North (history aside) and should do all we can to bank that win rather than think we have a sufficiently greater chance of beating GWS with Vince in.   Couple that with finally taking a stand against the MRP, I'm hot-headed enough to want to appeal.

That said, I agree with all those who say Bernie is an idiot, has let the team down etc.  What I don't agree with is the inconsistency of the MRP, and I'm not basing that on the outcomes of any particular week.  Sure, put the boot into Bernie, but that's not a reason to not put a boot into the MRP.

[Gator 16,918]

All incidents are treated in isolation, so forget about player 'X' from another club.  It's irrelevant.  

I thought the elbow was probably a one week penalty, but if his poor record deems it's 2 so be it.

It's called "personal responsibility".

 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

1 minute ago, ProDee said:

All incidents are treated in isolation, so forget about player 'X' from another club.  It's irrelevant.  

I thought the elbow was probably a one week penalty, but if his poor record deems it's 2 so be it.

It's called "personal responsibility".

 

The issue is that the MRP seem to use different parameters for each incident, the Zak Jones one is a perfect case in point.

[What 18,810]

So if youre Bernie VInce, Jordan Lewis or Jesse Hogan, don't hit anyone or you'll get suspended.

If you're Dustin Martin, you can hit someone and its all good, you will just get a fine.

[censored] the AFL and the MRP, cheating corrupt scum. 

[Chris 2,892]

7 minutes ago, Garbo said:

The hit was graded as intentional conduct with low impact to the head. I don't like that he won't be playing but I don't see how anyone could argue with a straight face that any of these are not the case.

No one should be raising the elbow as the run past so that's the intentional and he plainly got him to the head, the grading of low impact certainly isn't out of line with others this year

 

 

I don't think anyone is arguing it wasn't that. The fact remains though that Schofields was also intentional, low impact, and to the head. He wen't to the tribunal and was let off, we should do the same as Bernie's hit had no greater impact than Schofields. 

[sue 8,472]

6 minutes ago, ProDee said:

All incidents are treated in isolation, so forget about player 'X' from another club.  It's irrelevant.  

I thought the elbow was probably a one week penalty, but if his poor record deems it's 2 so be it.

It's called "personal responsibility".

 

No. It was 2 up to 3 for his record.  

X from another club is not irrelevant.  Feel free to argue that there have been no cases of different penalties for the same offence if you wish, but if there are such blatant cases, it is unjust. Nothing to do with personal responsibility (except that of the MRP and AFL staff who appear to have so little).

Edited July 17, 2017 by sue

[bluey 893]

Time to be rid of the liability!

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

36 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Jackson Trengove fined rather than suspended....awesome.....

Footage of his strike is at 3:05 in the below link.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2017-07-17/mrp-preview-has-dusty-done-his-dash

The MRP said the incident was "careless" and not "intentional".

Spare me.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Clint Bizkit

[Chris 2,892]

3 minutes ago, sue said:

No. It was 2 up to 3 for his record.  

X from another club is not irrelevant.  Feel free to argue that there have been no cases of different penalties for the same offence if you wish, but if there are such blatant cases, it is unjust. Nothing to do with personal responsibility (except that of the MRP and AFL staff who appear to have so little).

I think ProDee is taking the legal standpoint. His comment reminded me that I don't think precedent can count at the tribunal. They look at each case as its own in isolation from what has come before or what will come after. It allows them to easily and justifiably play favourites!

[mrtwister 650]

Schofield got off because the AFL couldn't prove that olivers self reported sore jaw couldn't have happened from when he made contact with Schofields spine. I don't think Adelaide have said Eddie had any issues with the contact. Different argument. 

[Chris 2,892]

5 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Footage of his strike is at 3:05 in the below link.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2017-07-17/mrp-preview-has-dusty-done-his-dash

The MRP said the incident was "careless" and not "intention'.

Spare me.

He flat out punched him in the head! How that could not be seen as intentional is beyond me, although I guess he wasn't holding chopsticks so its all good (actually its all good even when he is!)