Jnrmac, I agree with everything you have stated but I don't agree that the MRP is biased. I just think it's hopeless and woefully inconsistent, and that we have been on the wrong side of every single inconsistency.

I actually agree with ProDee on the issue of calling out 'bias'. I don't believe it is. In fact, I'm not quite sure why he was seeking to use my post as the vehicle for making his point.

I simply think that, where the inconsistency is so manifestly clear and patently unfair, we should stick up for ourselves and seek to have the sanction downgraded to the appropriate level. And eliminate all the inaccurate discussion in the media about the MFC playing anything but hard, contested football.

Vince actually received 3 weeks for his hit on Betts (reduced to 2 with an early plea - Betts said 2 wasn't even deserved). Vince also got fined for attacking the ball later in the game, an incident which absolutely should've been 'play on', something which has been confirmed by several non-MFC players and commentators since the incident.

I would like the club to highlight this and, as you have rightly said IMO, stick up for our players.

 

Edited July 21, 20177 yr by Ron Burgundy

Ron

When it comes to Brownlow 'favourites' or incubator teams like GWS, Sydney and GC it is hopelessly biased and compromised. You may be right with the inconsistencies but if it happens enough it is bias IMO.

And if the media jump on an incident or conversely ignore an incident the MRP usually follows suit. Its almost like they don't want to suspend any player unless they really have to. 

The Zak Jones Hannan hit was a disgrace and bias in my view as were the Martin and numerous Cotchin jumper punches. Cunnington not getting cited was seen almost as a payback because Vince is a niggler. Ditto Bugg who was not afforded the 'good bloke' status of Houli.

If the umps were consistent and paid frees and 50m penalties when they should the game would be in better shape with less tribunal cases to worry about becuase behavoural change from players would be rapid.. But they won't because they are under instructions from head office to keep the game moving.

 

Edited July 21, 20177 yr by jnrmac

23 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Ron

When it comes to Brownlow 'favourites' or incubator teams like GWS, Sydney and GC it is hopelessly biased and compromised. You may be right with the inconsistencies but if it happens enough it is bias IMO.

And if the media jump on an incident or conversely ignore an incident the MRP usually follows suit. Its almost like they don't want to suspend any player unless they really have to. 

The Zak Jones Hannan hit was a disgrace and bias in my view as were the Martin and numerous Cotchin jumper punches. Cunnington not getting cited was seen almost as a payback because Vince is a niggler. Ditto Bugg who was not afforded the 'good bloke' status of Houli.

If the umps were consistent and paid frees and 50m penalties when they should the game would be in better shape with less tribunal cases to worry about becuase behavoural change from players would be rapid.. But they won't because they are under instructions from head office to keep the game moving.

 

Naughty corner....far too much sense there ol chap 

 

2 hours ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Jnrmac, I agree with everything you have stated but I don't agree that the MRP is biased. 

Biased I suppose suggests a personal element by the members of the MRP.

How about guided then? Or directed? Or manipulated? 

The same decisions for and against certain teams/players happens far too often for it to be put down to inconsistency.

Edited July 21, 20177 yr by JTR

"And in the latest from the AFL Tribunal, Melbourne utility Bernie Vince received a two week suspension whilst North Korean full-forward Kim Jong Un copped a $1500 fine for staging public executions....."

Edited July 21, 20177 yr by ProperDee

On 17/07/2017 at 5:23 PM, Nasher said:

Got to say, while I agree that it's inconsistent and unfair and the MRP hate us and blah blah blah, my predominant thought is that I wish Bernie would keep his limbs under control. This is getting out of hand. This could have all been avoided if he'd kept his elbow to himself. 

The club should come out and say as I said in a comment on the Schofield decision, that while disappointed the club supports the fact that the head must be sacrosanct and any contact must be penalised. While continuing to play hard we will be concentrating on playing fair(let's not talk about within the rules) and will coach our players to not attack the head.

With Petraca coming back we should lead the way and reinforce that we will attack the body and lose our bruise free reputation

2 hours ago, dpositive said:

The club should come out and say as I said in a comment on the Schofield decision, that while disappointed the club supports the fact that the head must be sacrosanct and any contact must be penalised. While continuing to play hard we will be concentrating on playing fair(let's not talk about within the rules) and will coach our players to not attack the head.

With Petraca coming back we should lead the way and reinforce that we will attack the body and lose our bruise free reputation

You sure you don't mean Brayshaw?

6 hours ago, hardtack said:

You sure you don't mean Brayshaw?

Oops of course.

Bit rattled acclimatising in Tassie

Saw the news tonight and it was all about Bernie Vince and his hits on the Beams brothers. The tone was "bernie has done it again' and this infuriates me. I have seen it in the write ups of the game as well.

The Spoil on D Beams was a genuine two person contest. Fair enough with the free as he collected him high but not malicious nor intentional. Yet the media goes with the 'Bernie introuble again'. No way is that a report.

The second incident with Clay Beams was worse. Beams actually dived and took out bernies legs. Was very dangerous and exactly what the rule was brought in to stop. Almost hyperextended his knees. Yet the commentary is that Bernies knee collected Beam's head and 'Bernie may go for this second incident'.

It riles me that the club doesn't get on the front foot with these incidents. We all know that the media have a big say in whether the MRP actually bring a charge or not and we need to be on the front foot to ensure nothing comes of either of these things.

3 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Saw the news tonight and it was all about Bernie Vince and his hits on the Beams brothers. The tone was "bernie has done it again' and this infuriates me. I have seen it in the write ups of the game as well.

The Spoil on D Beams was a genuine two person contest. Fair enough with the free as he collected him high but not malicious nor intentional. Yet the media goes with the 'Bernie introuble again'. No way is that a report.

The second incident with Clay Beams was worse. Beams actually dived and took out bernies legs. Was very dangerous and exactly what the rule was brought in to stop. Almost hyperextended his knees. Yet the commentary is that Bernies knee collected Beam's head and 'Bernie may go for this second incident'.

It riles me that the club doesn't get on the front foot with these incidents. We all know that the media have a big say in whether the MRP actually bring a charge or not and we need to be on the front foot to ensure nothing comes of either of these things.

100% agree. It's a joke.

The fact that either incident is looked at is ridiculous.

One was a genuine attempt to spoil and one player copped a slightly high hit? Big deal, it happens all the time and is called a free kick.

The other he stopped running and Beams went head first into his knees.

Media are a complete joke and so are the MRP. If he gets in trouble for either the club just has to appeal.

The second incident almost was a free for contact below the knees 

Love the guy but seriously will he ever learn to keep that elbow down?

More anti Bernie nonsense. One incident was eyes on the ball and some chap sticks his head in the way. The other incident was when some prawn ran head first into him. FFS this is all getting silly.

Well I've just looked at both and gotta say storm in a tea cup. With Dayne eyes are for the ball and free kick is enough. Think he's in the clear with Clay as well

2 hours ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

The second incident almost was a free for contact below the knees 

Almost?  Was.  

It was just a good honest hard contest. Both players went for the ball. It's good to watch. The only way he'd get suspended for that is if the MRP has put a few $$$ on the pies next week 

7 minutes ago, Abe said:

It was just a good honest hard contest. Both players went for the ball. It's good to watch. The only way he'd get suspended for that is if the MRP has put a few $$$ on the pies next week *

*or maybe on GW$ to win the flag

So he is out then ?

Nothing in either. Move on!

 

Maggots and MRP trying to take Bernie out of Competition....conspiracy, spitefulness, jealousy, childish, colorblind and followers of other teams. Well it won't work...... 

2 hours ago, Big Demon said:

More anti Bernie nonsense. One incident was eyes on the ball and some chap sticks his head in the way. The other incident was when some prawn ran head first into him. FFS this is all getting silly.

Agree with half of this.

Clay Beams was certainly at fault as he dived head first into Bernie knees, attempting to draw a free kick.

The problem with the Dayne incident is that Bernie took his eyes off the ball when going back with the flight - eyes on the ball, then there'd be no problem.

With that said, I don't think he has any case to answer.  The forearm was careless rather than malicious, and a quick peek at the stats will tell you that Beams was hardly impeded by the knock.

 

5 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Agree with half of this.

Clay Beams was certainly at fault as he dived head first into Bernie knees, attempting to draw a free kick.

The problem with the Dayne incident is that Bernie took his eyes off the ball when going back with the flight - eyes on the ball, then there'd be no problem.

With that said, I don't think he has any case to answer.  The forearm was careless rather than malicious, and a quick peek at the stats will tell you that Beams was hardly impeded by the knock.

 

Inb4 delayed concussion and broken jaw 

11 hours ago, layzie said:

Love the guy but seriously will he ever learn to keep that elbow down?

How else would you suggest he spoil?  T-Rex it?

first was a free kick against bern, second should've been a free kick for him

he'll get four weeks

1 hour ago, JTR said:

How else would you suggest he spoil?  T-Rex it?

If you see my later post after watching the reply and actually seeing the incident I say it was fine. 

$1,500 fine.

Another low level offence this year and he'll automatically be suspended for 1 week.

Bernard a bit lucky as this is the fourth time he's been found guilty this year.