15 minutes ago, BDA said:

The match day commentators insinuating JVR has a case to answer, the media following suit yesterday. Today all the commentariat saying MFC should appeal and JVR will get off. Weird.

BAAAAA!

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Ballard has not suffered an injury and Dew expects he will play this Friday night.  They should throw it out before he even gets there 

AFL/VFL have been doing us for a long long time.Example 1963 RDB rubbed for belting roger Dean cost us a final.Wish he had have hit him the little diver,and put him 3 rows back in the soutthern stand.

15 minutes ago, forever demons said:

AFL/VFL have been doing us for a long long time.Example 1963 RDB rubbed for belting roger Dean cost us a final.Wish he had have hit him the little diver,and put him 3 rows back in the soutthern stand.

From an eye witness (me, on the Punt Rd hill side of the ground almost directly opposite the play) RDB did not touch him. RDB was tackled with the ball from front on, tried to punch it away, could not because Dean had his hands on the ball as well and Dean threw his head back to stage for a free kick. It was all a phony report. Hurts till this day.

RDB was tough, fearless and unrelenting but he was a pure, clean scrupulously fair footballer. A belated pardon would not go astray.

Edited May 8, 20232 yr by tiers
More emphasis need. Old age too.

6 minutes ago, tiers said:

From an eye witness (me, on the Punt Rd hill side of the ground almost directly opposite the play) RDB did not touch him. RDB was tackled with the ball from front on, tried to punch it away, could not because Dean had his hands on the ball as well and Dean threw his head back to stage for a free kick. It was all a phony report. Hurts till this day.

RDB was tough, fearless and unrelenting but he was a pure, clean footballer. A belated pardon would not go astray.

I think Dean admitted years later that he wasn't hit.

I think they also wanted to bring in some TV footage but Tribunal refused.

I think it’s high time that all 18 clubs should lobby the AFL and media outlets for an immediate ceasefire on commentating in a purely subjective manner on match day reports. 
 

I understand it gets them clicks and obviously revenue as well but ffs the damage it is doing to the game is being amplified after every single charge - whether it be obvious or not. 
 

There’s now 4 frikken umpires on the field and not even they can pull a report of their ahole like the MRO can. 
 

So frustrating. 🤬

2 hours ago, Wadda We Sing said:

Do we know what time the actual hearing is yet?

Tribunal hearings are usually Tuesday nights from around 5:30pm Wadda. Could be a long night, three clubs are heading to the tribunal this week. 

Edited May 8, 20232 yr by Dee Zephyr

Feels like a bit of overkill with MRO and Press but very happy that we have appealed the decision. Striking, do they know what striking is, at worst should have been a fine for overzealous attempt to spoil.!!!!

1 hour ago, BDA said:

The match day commentators insinuating JVR has a case to answer, the media following suit yesterday. Today all the commentariat saying MFC should appeal and JVR will get off. Weird.

Probably because instead of jumping the gun when they saw the stretcher come out they've now had a proper look at it, realised the GC player is not badly hurt and will probably play this week. All too eager to grab a headline. Should be thrown out before it even gets to the tribunal 

Match reviews should be put through an AI app. Not sure how it would learn from the range of past (woeful) decisions but I am sure the AFL would think that's a minor consideration. 

23 minutes ago, tiers said:

From an eye witness (me, on the Punt Rd hill side of the ground almost directly opposite the play) RDB did not touch him. RDB was tackled with the ball from front on, tried to punch it away, could not because Dean had his hands on the ball as well and Dean threw his head back to stage for a free kick. It was all a phony report. Hurts till this day.

RDB was tough, fearless and unrelenting but he was a pure, clean scrupulously fair footballer. A belated pardon would not go astray.

Agree T. RDB not a dirty player but a tough and fearless player and leader. And Neville Crows was over stated also. Couldn't trust Dean as he could not lie straight in bed!!! 

BTW RDB Robbie and ( Clarry in 4/5 years) are our best modern ie 1960 players ever.  Gawny and Trac might just join them also beote they retire.

18 minutes ago, loges said:

Probably because instead of jumping the gun when they saw the stretcher come out they've now had a proper look at it, realised the GC player is not badly hurt and will probably play this week. All too eager to grab a headline. Should be thrown out before it even gets to the tribunal 

It should have been a red flag to MRO that Ballard held the back of his head, even though contact was on his forehead.  I mean, derrrr

The AFL have leaked to one of their spokespeople the Zapruder film which apparently shows JVR looking at his opponent. Personally I’m not sure how looking at someone is a crime but I would think sizing up where an opponent is at to determine how you attempt to contest is actually the responsible thing to do. I don’t see how that’s incriminating at all. As far as I can tell his eyes are on the ball from the moment he leaps to make the spoil. 

I’d also suggest both JVR and Ballard misread the drop of the ball as it seems to drift away from the goal post late. Without that late drift of the footy JVR would’ve spoiled it cleanly. 

 

 

1 hour ago, BDA said:

The match day commentators insinuating JVR has a case to answer, the media following suit yesterday. Today all the commentariat saying MFC should appeal and JVR will get off. Weird.

7 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The AFL have leaked to one of their spokespeople the Zapruder film which apparently shows JVR looking at his opponent. Personally I’m not sure how looking at someone is a crime but I would think sizing up where an opponent is at to determine how you attempt to contest is actually the responsible thing to do.

I think this is an excellent point, and not just for this case. The alternative would seem to suggest a more reckless approach. 

2 hours ago, daisycutter said:

i think we would be better off using one of the many other similar incidents

not the cripps one, because firstly it is quite different but more importantly most commentators and public think he was guilty and only got off because his legal team "gamed" the system. finally the afl vowed that that type of legal arguing would not be allowed in future

building a case around cripps would just create a very risky can of worms

That's for the 'law - errs' to work out: I posted the footage just to once again prove how corrupt and inconsistent the AFL Industry is. In essence, I don't think it's 'quite' that different': both players were attacking the ball, and, as quite often happens in contact sport, especially AFL - player from the opposite side is contesting the same ball.

In other words, a bit of consistency instead of verbal Jesuitry and sophistry, not to mention the sheer inanity of making up new laws as it suits them to cover their backsides. And to have Mike Christian playing Pontius Pilate every week is yet another farcical aspect of the circus. 

At least the dees will get some coverage on 360 and on the couch this week.

Pity it will only involve a million replays of the incident and silly back and forth about football acts, head being sacrosanct (is the neck adjacent sacrosanct?), Ralphy guessing the outcome, blah, blah, blah.

And then they can get back to the Pies.

By the by, my take is Rooey could have ruined him but actually appeared to take great care not to get him in the head.

So, he did exactly what players are apparently supposed to do - show a duty of care and accept the risk that if someone is hurt, and in particular concussed, they will face a penalty. 

In contrary to the pathetic jump to conclusion commentary of Dunstall and Derwayne, Roey DID NOT HIT BALLARD'S HEAD, nor did Ballard's head hit the ground.

Watching live it was pretty clear their concern was his neck - hence the, totally appropriate, care, they provided and the long break in the game that ensued (imagine how differently this would have played out if he had got up and taken himself off the ground - the 'optics' would have been completely different and it we would have not had to sit thru bonehead ex footballers moralizing and 50 replays and close ups of a distressed JVR ) 

But bottom line is he wasn't injured badly, no concussion and will play this week. And i would argue that's all because Rooey DID show Ballard a duty of care.

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 20232 yr by binman

It's all about image. The AFL are pretending to care about player safety when in fact they have done nothing to address it apart from banning the bump.

21 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The AFL have leaked to one of their spokespeople the Zapruder film which apparently shows JVR looking at his opponent. Personally I’m not sure how looking at someone is a crime but I would think sizing up where an opponent is at to determine how you attempt to contest is actually the responsible thing to do. I don’t see how that’s incriminating at all. As far as I can tell his eyes are on the ball from the moment he leaps to make the spoil. 

I’d also suggest both JVR and Ballard misread the drop of the ball as it seems to drift away from the goal post late. Without that late drift of the footy JVR would’ve spoiled it cleanly. 

 

 

How anyone can say so definitively as Ralph does where his eyes are from that video is beyond me.   And to simultaneously imply that where the eyes are is the sole determinant of 'guilt' is also beyond me.

A lot of media outlets labelled the incident 'clumsy' so I thought we'd take a trip down memory lane. Anyone remember Paddy Mccartin cannoning into Neville Jetta in 2018 at Marvel? I was there and thought the action he took really didn't need to happen and he was quite late. He suffered one of his many concussions in this collision and I did not hear one person call it clumsy or suggest it should have gone to the MRO. I love Paddy Mccartin but to me this was no worse than what JVR did.

 

 

1 hour ago, tiers said:

From an eye witness (me, on the Punt Rd hill side of the ground almost directly opposite the play) RDB did not touch him. RDB was tackled with the ball from front on, tried to punch it away, could not because Dean had his hands on the ball as well and Dean threw his head back to stage for a free kick. It was all a phony report. Hurts till this day.

RDB was tough, fearless and unrelenting but he was a pure, clean scrupulously fair footballer. A belated pardon would not go astray.

And Roger Dean was THE prima donna stager of all time...

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

The AFL have leaked to one of their spokespeople the Zapruder film which apparently shows JVR looking at his opponent. Personally I’m not sure how looking at someone is a crime but I would think sizing up where an opponent is at to determine how you attempt to contest is actually the responsible thing to do. I don’t see how that’s incriminating at all. As far as I can tell his eyes are on the ball from the moment he leaps to make the spoil. 

I’d also suggest both JVR and Ballard misread the drop of the ball as it seems to drift away from the goal post late. Without that late drift of the footy JVR would’ve spoiled it cleanly. 

 

 

If you don't look you could clatter into your opponent any old how and cause worse damage.

1 hour ago, binman said:

In contrary to the pathetic jump to conclusion commentary of Dunstall and Derwayne, Roey DID NOT HIT BALLARD'S HEAD, nor did Ballard's head hit the ground.

 

JVR definitely gives him a good coat hangering around the head which causes the neck concern. Let's not deny that. But that's a risk when any player makes a spoil.

The thing that never gets discussed in incidents like this because people fear that it's victim blaming is how many players have lost the ability to protect themselves.

Ballard should've turned his body away from JVR, jumped to get to the ball early and stuck his backside out to protect the space. 

Had he done even part of that the worst he would've got is the arm in to his guts.

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

The AFL have leaked to one of their spokespeople the Zapruder film which apparently shows JVR looking at his opponent. Personally I’m not sure how looking at someone is a crime but I would think sizing up where an opponent is at to determine how you attempt to contest is actually the responsible thing to do. I don’t see how that’s incriminating at all. As far as I can tell his eyes are on the ball from the moment he leaps to make the spoil. 

I’d also suggest both JVR and Ballard misread the drop of the ball as it seems to drift away from the goal post late. Without that late drift of the footy JVR would’ve spoiled it cleanly. 

 

 

the comments on ralph's twit go to show ralph is a twit [censored]

edit:  [one letter different that twit] 🤣

Edited May 8, 20232 yr by daisycutter

3 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

JVR definitely gives him a good coat hangering around the head which causes the neck concern. Let's not deny that. But that's a risk when any player makes a spoil.

The thing that never gets discussed in incidents like this because people fear that it's victim blaming is how many players have lost the ability to protect themselves.

Ballard should've turned his body away from JVR, jumped to get to the ball early and stuck his backside out to protect the space. 

Had he done even part of that the worst he would've got is the arm in to his guts.

maybe he should have ds, but hell it was a very difficult ball drop to judge