Jump to content

Featured Replies

Collins sustained no injury from this incident. It's complete  horse $hite from the Afl once again. The gross incompetence  of these so called tribunal members is a bad joke. 

 

 

 
7 hours ago, chook fowler said:

i don't think Jack will be offered a MENSA membership any time soon

I consider that this is the crux of the matter. 

 

Has a change of plea occurred during a hearing before?

29 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:
"DON'T TRY ME" 
 
Viney and Collins were clearly talking during the incident. Viney says Collins was challenging him to hit him, and Viney replied "don't try me".

Is this legit?

Bloody hell what a pisser!


1 minute ago, McQueen said:

Well the only person who could clarify that is Collins.

Yep, the video angle wasn't conclusive. I wasn't sure whether contact was to his neck or jaw from the angle everyone was judging on last night.

First look seemed the jaw/side of head but as I say...inconclusive.

Unless there is better video then Collins is the man to clarify.

  • Author
4 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Well the only person who could clarify that is Collins.

Agree.  Are they allowed to call the other player in to give evidence? 

 
9 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

It’s been clarified that they only pleaded guilty to the serious misconduct charge and not the point of contact 

Not the point I was making.  legal counsel would surely know before his client pleads guilty or otherwise what the charge actually is.   My point was how could our legal counsel let the hearing get all the way to the penalty stage without knowing what Jack pleaded guilty to.  

What did Anderson think 'serious misconduct' meant a light touch to the jaw!  If so it would never have got to the Tribunal.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero

From the vision the jaw is a fair call and would be almost impossible to refute.

Edited by McQueen
jaw not neck


2 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Is this legit?

Bloody hell what a pisser!

Made me chuckle too. I’m following it on AFL.com and Nathan Schmook posted it about half an hour ago. 

Just now, Demons11 said:

Agree.  Are they allowed to call the other player in to give evidence? 

And the afl didn't even bother getting  collins to call. Its amateur hour really 

 

  • Author
1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Not the point I was making.  legal counsel would surely know before his client pleads guilty or otherwise what the charge actually is.   My point was how could our legal counsel let the hearing get all the way to the penalty stage without knowing what Jack pleaded guilty to.  

?

Just now, McQueen said:

From the vision the jaw is a fair call and would be almost impossible to refute.

oops - meant jaw.

Surely the onus is on the prosecution to call Collins to testify that contact was made to the neck? And presumably they didn't call him for a reason. Only two people know exactly where contact was made, and Viney has said it was to the jaw. Without conflicting evidence, surely that has to be taken in good faith? 


Just now, Skuit said:

Surely the onus is on the prosecution to call Collins to testify that contact was made to the neck? And presumably they didn't call him for a reason. Only two people know exactly where contact was made, and Viney has said it was to the jaw. Without conflicting evidence, surely that has to be taken in good faith? 

Yep, Gleeson has gone out on a limb here and ius the real amateur.

16 minutes ago, McQueen said:

This could backfire badly here....

Agree. Fair chance they will upgrade the 2 weeks to 3 weeks if found to be to the throat. 
 

6 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Surely the onus is on the prosecution to call Collins to testify that contact was made to the neck? And presumably they didn't call him for a reason. Only two people know exactly where contact was made, and Viney has said it was to the jaw. Without conflicting evidence, surely that has to be taken in good faith? 

Hard to do when Gleeson told the Tribunal to treat Viney's evidence as 'nonsense'.

Based on the AFL website, Gleeson is almost saying Viney is lying:  On Viney's evidence that contact was to the jaw, he says: "You'll have no difficulty rejecting that submission when you look at the evidence ... he's given evidence that is flatly inconsistent with what he knew he did."

Bit of a stretch by a leagle eagle.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero

14 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Can't believe Anderson had him plead guilty to a 'serious misconduct' charge without knowing/checking the nature of the conduct.  It was clear at the start of the hearing it was about elbow contact and force to the throat and neck region.  

He gets to the point of penalty the penny drops the charge is more serious than he thought, withdraws the guilty plea and tries to renegotiate the charge down to contact to the jaw. 

Amateur hour by Anderson.

5 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Not the point I was making.  legal counsel would surely know before his client pleads guilty or otherwise what the charge actually is.   My point was how could our legal counsel let the hearing get all the way to the penalty stage without knowing what Jack pleaded guilty to.  

What did Anderson think 'serious misconduct' meant a light touch to the jaw!  If so it would never have got to the Tribunal.

Ease up Lucifer, you don't know what you're talking about.

Serious Misconduct is not defined in the AFL's Tribunal Guidelines.

There is nothing within that phrase which requires a player to make contact to any particular part of the body.

The charge against Viney is that he committed serious misconduct. He pleaded guilty to that. Without the benefit of a "charge sheet" (if such a thing is given to a player) or otherwise the transcript of precisely what he was asked to plead to, I reckon you and anyone else criticising Anderson should ease off.


Viney says Jaw, maybe he thinks everyone’s Jaw is as big as his aha 

21 minutes ago, McQueen said:

This could backfire badly here....

It surely will ?

 

video evidence inconclusive and no evidence presented to confirm contact was with the throat. On what basis can the jury convict?

6 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Surely the onus is on the prosecution to call Collins to testify that contact was made to the neck? And presumably they didn't call him for a reason. Only two people know exactly where contact was made, and Viney has said it was to the jaw. Without conflicting evidence, surely that has to be taken in good faith? 

You know what David Byrne would say? He’d say STOP MAKING SENSE! ? 


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • PREVIEW: Gold Coast

    The Gold Coast Suns find themselves outside of the top eight for the first time since Round 1 with pressure is mounting on the entire organisation. Their coach Damien Hardwick expressed his frustration at his team’s condition last week by making a middle-finger gesture on television that earned him a fine for his troubles. He showed his desperation by claiming that Fox should pick up the tab.  There’s little doubt the Suns have shown improvement in 2025, and their position on the ladder is influenced to some extent by having played fewer games than their rivals for a playoff role at the end of the season, courtesy of the disruption caused by Cyclone Alfred in March.  However, they are following the same trajectory that hindered the club in past years whenever they appeared to be nearing their potential. As a consequence, that Hardwick gesture should be considered as more than a mere behavioral lapse. It’s a distress signal that does not bode well for the Queenslanders. While the Suns are eager to remain in contention with the top eight, Melbourne faces its own crisis, which is similarly deep-seated but in a much different way. After recovering from a disappointing start to the season and nearing a return to respectability among its peer clubs, the Demons have experienced a decline in status, driven by the fact that while their form has been reasonable (see their performance against the ladder leader in the Kings Birthday match), their conversion in front of goal is poor enough to rank last in the competition. Furthermore, their opponents find them exceptionally easy to score against. As a result, they have effectively eliminated themselves from the finals race and are again positioned to finish in the bottom half of the ladder.

    • 3 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 15

    As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • Like
    • 276 replies
  • REPORT: Port Adelaide

    Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

    • 3 replies
  • CASEY: Essendon

    Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Gold Coast

    The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

      • Like
    • 159 replies
  • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

    • 33 replies