Jump to content

JvR Free!!!

Demonland
Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

I think you can take it to the bank that Gleeson is behind this decision.

Not one former player has said JVR should have been reported, so why would these two be any different, unless they were pressured.

How was a written decision made in 16 minutes, after the time needed for discussion  about the evidence and the rules?

I am highly suspicious of this decision.

I see an Appeal and a win.

I see the AFL then doing the big PR about them doing everything to prevent injuries.

I just hope that JVR is alright and not badly affected by this.

BTW: anyone see any similarities in recent events, Kozzie bumps, no injury but 2 games, JVR does an action within the rules, no injury, but 2 games, under a duty of care that is not mentioned in the relevant rule.

To be fair the Kosi bump, although no injury was sustained, is so so so much worse than JVR’s spoil, that it’s actually laughable that those two ended up with the same penalty.
It’s absolutely incomparable actions. One was totally unnecessary and off the ball. One was in play and IN THE RULES. One had the intention to hurt and one had the intention to contest the ball.

If we don’t appeal this I’ll be very upset and if we don’t win the appeal I’ll know for sure that the AFL is corrupt.

Can you imagine Jeremy Cameron, Scott Pendlebury, or Lachie Neale getting suspended for this same action in September? No you couldn’t, because it would NEVER happen. The AFL makes up rubbish rulings every week to suit whatever dumb agenda they want to push at the time, and young no name players from small clubs suffer as a result. 

  • Quote
    • Like 5
     

    18.5.3 on 'Permitted Contact':

    "Incidental contact in a Marking contest will be permitted if the Player’s sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark."

    Gleeson conceded that JVRs intent was to spoil but adds that any reasonable player couldn’t spoil without causing impact.

    I wonder whether we are all being played for fools here and this will be successfully appealed under error of law, however the AFL will then initiate an immediate revision of this and other rules like it where any football action that a reasonable player performs will be done with a duty of a care.  
     

    Previously any football action was a grey area and somewhat protected can now have a definitive line where players can now be suspendable performing football acts that are not reasonable in their endeavour. 

    Edited by Gawndy the Great

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    8 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

    To be fair the Kosi bump, although no injury was sustained, is so so so much worse than JVR’s spoil, that it’s actually laughable that those two ended up with the same penalty.
    It’s absolutely incomparable actions. One was totally unnecessary and off the ball. One was in play and IN THE RULES. One had the intention to hurt and one had the intention to contest the ball.

    If we don’t appeal this I’ll be very upset and if we don’t win the appeal I’ll know for sure that the AFL is corrupt.

    Can you imagine Jeremy Cameron, Scott Pendlebury, or Lachie Neale getting suspended for this same action in September? No you couldn’t, because it would NEVER happen. The AFL makes up rubbish rulings every week to suit whatever dumb agenda they want to push at the time, and young no name players from small clubs suffer as a result. 

    Barry Hall, the Swans Captain, punched a bloke in the guts, 150 metres away from the ball ,in a PF and the Tribunal found it was IN PLAY.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     

    2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    all down to the 0.8 seconds where the eyes were off the ball.

    This gives them the precedent to suspend JVR while still maintaining that the spoil is allowed.

    It is what it is.............

    In his evidence, which was impressive for its candour, he said that he looked up and watched the ball as he ran to the contest. A few steps before arriving at the contest he took his eyes off the ball and look at, or in the immediate direction of Ballard, who was shaping to mark the ball.

     

    "We are not critical of van Rooyen for doing this; it was reasonable for him to look at Ballard and the drop of the ball and assess the situation. We find his objective at the moment of, and prior to impact, was to spoil the mark. However we also find that a reasonable player would have foreseen that in spoiling the way he did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in a forceful blow to Ballard's head.

    That determination is completely idiotic, the AFL has jumped the shark

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    7 minutes ago, wizardinoz said:

    And this wasn't cited????

    Why would it be cited, he just jumped off the ground, running as fast as he could and smashed Murphy in the face, breaking Murphy's nose.

    No reasonable player doing that would have thought that someone might be hurt.

    Just ask the MRO, he will tell you. Then ask Gleeson and he will agree.

  • Quote
    • Like 7
     
    8 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

    It is an absolute farce… there is literally no difference.

    Yes there is.

    Murphy got a broken nose.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    I think this is an absurd decision. JVR is banned doing a legal action under the rules and laws of the game. No swinging arm. No concussion.  It’s a spoiling attempt that hit the other player in the head. Wow that’s 10-12 incidents per match every week.  

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
    On 5/7/2023 at 6:59 PM, defuture15 said:

    Here is the story of ruinator. The one the authorities came to blame.

    For something that he never done....

    #freevanrooyen

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    2 hours ago, Redleg said:

    Jeff Gleeson imo has possibly convinced the 2 ex footballers to side with him.

    We now have the situation where apparently the entire football world, except this Tribunal thought he should never have been even cited.

    You now can’t spoil , bump, tackle, kick the ball anywhere near another player, as you have a duty of care not to hurt or strike or hit anyone.

    If this is not overturned the game can’t be played in any way other than by touch footy.

    Whately and Robbo said it must be appealed for the sake of the game.

    Possibly Gleeson .... or Gleeson (and the others?) coerced by somone upon high within the AFL to deliver a pre-determined outcome?

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Any KCs here willing  to do pro bono work to save roo?

    Edited by Satan

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    After all this is over, the AFL need to apologise to JVR, the MFC and their supporters.

    Better still, put the whole tribunal in some stocks errected outside Gate 5 at the MCGand let us throw rotten vegetables and fish heads at them.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Haha 2
    13 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

    Possibly Gleeson .... or Gleeson (and the others?) coerced by somone upon high within the AFL to deliver a pre-determined outcome?

    I suspect Gleeson was worded up prior, to back the MRO this week after some very poor outcomes in recent weeks. That’s how the AFL operates. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    1 hour ago, Seraph said:

    "However we also find that a reasonable player would have foreseen that in spoiling the way he did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in a forceful blow to Ballard's head."

    We're honestly one step away from banning players for injuring themselves.

    "We also find that a reasonable player would have forseen that in jumping for the ball in the way they did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in them forcefully hitting their head on the ground. We therefore must uphold the decision to ban them for 2 matches."

    What utter [censored] 🤮 The contact and spirit of our game is now dead. Wokeism is now a part of AFL sanitation squad!

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    not even downgraded from high to medium impact ... wtf ... double jeopardy

     

    Edited by daisycutter

  • Quote

     

    Our former Captain and number 2 doesn’t seem to agree with the decision either. 🔴🔵

    IMG_5956.png

    Edited by Deevout

  • Quote
    • Like 8
    • Love 2

    This is just plain flawed. What he is saying is that if there is a free kick, it can be reportable, but if there was no free kick, it is not reportable. The rule says nothing about that. He has just made it up.

    Under “Spirit and Intention” law 18.5.1 reads: “The Player whose sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark shall be permitted to do so”.

    Under “Permitted Contact” law 18.5.3 reads: “Incidental contact in a Marking contest will be permitted if the Player’s sole objective is to contest or spoil a Mark”.

    Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson KC credited that as a valid point – but said it created a “complex” issue.

    “If conduct could not constitute a free kick, it is not presently apparent to me how that same conduct could constitute a reportable offence,” Gleeson said.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    2 hours ago, Seraph said:

    "However we also find that a reasonable player would have foreseen that in spoiling the way he did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in a forceful blow to Ballard's head."

    We're honestly one step away from banning players for injuring themselves.

    "We also find that a reasonable player would have forseen that in jumping for the ball in the way they did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in them forcefully hitting their head on the ground. We therefore must uphold the decision to ban them for 2 matches."

    What utter [censored] 🤮 The contact element and spirit of our game is now dead.! Weĺcome to Wokeism AFL Style which is now a part of AFL sanitation squad! Unless òf course u are ........!

    Edited by picket fence

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • GAMEDAY: Brisbane

      It’s Game Day, and the Demons are back on the road with a massive challenge ahead — facing the reigning premiers, the Brisbane Lions, at their Gabba fortress. The Lions are licking their wounds after a shock draw in Tasmania last week, while Melbourne’s season hangs in the balance. Can the Dees defy the odds and pull off a miracle to keep their razor thin finals hopes alive?

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 17 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 10

      The Sir Doug Nicholls Round kicks off in Darwin with a Top 4 clash between the Suns and the Hawks. On Friday night the Swans will be seeking to rebound from a challenging start to the season, while the Blues have the Top 8 in their sights after their sluggish start. Saturdays matches kick off with a blockbuster between the Collingwood and Kuwarna with the Magpies looking to maintain their strong form and the Crows aiming to make a statement on the road. The Power face a difficult task to revive their season against a resilient Cats side looking to make amends for their narrow loss last week. The Giants aim to reinforce their top-eight status, while the Dockers will be looking to break the travel hoodoo. The sole Saturday game is a critical matchup for both teams, as the Bulldogs strive to cemet their spot in the top six and the Bombers desperately want break into the 8. Sundays start with a bottom 3 clash between the Tigers and Kangaroos with both teams wanting to avoid the being in wooden spoon contention. The Round concludes with the Eagles still searching for their first win of the season, while the Saints look to keep their finals hopes alive with a crucial away victory. Who are you tipping and what are the best results for the Demons?

        • Thanks
      • 165 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Brisbane

      And just like that, we’re Narrm again. Even though the annual AFL Sir Doug Nicholls Round which commemorates the contributions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture to our game has been a welcome addition to our calendar for ten years, more lately it has been a portent of tough times ahead for we beleaguered Narrm supporters. Ever since the club broke through for its historic 2021 premiership, this has become a troubling time of the year for the club. For example, it all began when Melbourne rebranded itself as Narrm across the two rounds of the Sir Doug Nicholls Round to become the first club to adopt an Indigenous club name especially for the occasion. It won its first outing under the brand against lowly North Melbourne to go to 10 wins and no losses but not without a struggle or a major injury to  star winger Ed Langdon who broke his ribs and missed several weeks. In the following week, still as Narrm, the team’s 17 game winning streak came to an end at the hands of the Dockers. That came along with more injuries, a plague that remained with them for the remainder of the season until, beset by injuries, the Dees were eliminated from the finals in straight sets. It was even worse last year, when Narrm inexplicably lowered its colours in Perth to the Waalit Marawar Eagles. Oh, the shame of it all! At least this year, if there is a corner to turn around, it has to be in the direction of something better. To that end, I produced a special pre-game chant in the local Narrm language - “nam mi:wi winnamun katjil prolin ambi ngamar thamelin amb” which roughly translated is “every heart beats true for the red and the blue.” >y belief is that if all of the Narrm faithful recite it long enough, then it might prove to be the only way to beat the Brisbane Lions at the Gabba on Sunday. The Lions are coming off a disappointing draw at Marvel Stadium against a North Melbourne team that lacks the ability and know how to win games (except when playing Melbourne). Brisbane are, however, a different kettle of fish at home and have very few positional weaknesses. They are a midfield powerhouse, strong in defence and have plenty of forward options, particularly their small and medium sized players, to kick a winning score this week after the sting of last week’s below par performance.

        • Clap
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 11 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Hawthorn

      There was a time during the current Melbourne cycle that goes back to before the premiership when the club was the toughest to beat in the fourth quarter. The Demons were not only hard to beat at any time but it was virtually impossible to get the better them when scores were close at three quarter time. It was only three or four years ago but they were fit, strong and resilient in body and mind. Sadly, those days are over. This has been the case since the club fell off its pedestal about 12 months ago after it beat Geelong and then lost to Carlton. In both instances, Melbourne put together strong, stirring final quarters, one that resulted in victory, the other, in defeat. Since then, the drop off has been dramatic to the point where it can neither pull off victory in close matches, nor can it even go down in defeat  gallantly.

        • Clap
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 1 reply
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Footscray

      At twenty-four minutes into the third term of the game between the Casey Demons and Footscray VFL at Whitten Oval, the visitors were coasting. They were winning all over the ground, had the ascendancy in the ruck battles and held a 26 point lead on a day perfect for football. What could go wrong? Everything. The Bulldogs moved into overdrive in the last five minutes of the term and booted three straight goals to reduce the margin to a highly retrievable eight points at the last break. Bouyed by that effort, their confidence was on a high level during the interval and they ran all over the despondent Demons and kicked another five goals to lead by a comfortable margin of four goals deep into the final term before Paddy Cross kicked a couple of too late goals for a despondent Casey. A testament to their lack of pressure in the latter stages of the game was the fact that Footscray’s last ten scoring shots were nine goals and one rushed behind. Things might have been different for the Demons who went into the game after last week’s bye with 12 AFL listed players. Blake Howes was held over for the AFL game but two others, Jack Billings and Taj Woewodin (not officially listed as injured) were also missing and they could have been handy at the end. Another mystery of the current VFL system.

        • Thanks
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Brisbane

      The Demons head back out on the road in Round 10 when they travel to Queensland to take on the reigning Premiers and the top of the table Lions who look very formidable. Can the Dees cause a massive upset? Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 284 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All