iv'a worn smith

Pressure point. Really??? And a guy with no priors?

Thanks. perhaps credence to the old joke: What's the difference between a laboratory rat and a Lawyer? A................................. there are certain things a laboratory rat just won't do.

The only issue with which I have a contention is how can it be categorically stated that the delayed onset of concussion, which beset Rowe, was as a direct result of the blow from Jesse. In the course of 4 quarters of football, a scrimmage, bump, a fall to the ground, inadvertent shoulder to the head in marking contest, or a legal tackle could have caused the same issue. The question is, how would anybody actually know for sure? In the absence of taking 'evidence' from the protagonists, it seems patently obvious to me that the MRP system is flawed, when it can hand down a sanction based purely on video footage and a Doctor's report, which could not possibly provide a direct correlation between the incident and the injury concerned

Jesse. No priors and I would say debatable as to the damage actually caused by the blow. But we will never know, because the AFL treat us like mugs. One week for mine and with an early plea, down to a fine.

They deserved a sanction. There is no doubt about that. However, what is at issue here is exactly how the process works and whether it is equitable. Clearly it is not.

I agree Bullet. It is ludicrous to hand down sanctions, without thoroughly examining all of the relevant facts. A number of MRP members are close to the media themselves and human nature will tell you that even if by osmosis, you must be influenced by media commentary on such topics. To me Lewis' action was the worst of the two, but he was slammed in the back by Weitering, while he was unprotected and unsuspecting, following the incident with Cripps. Is that action justifiable? I know we are clearly not talking courts of law, so I won't present that analogy, other than to say, I cannot think of any other jurisdiction, whether it be civil or in sport, where the person facing the charge does not have a right of reply or the opportunity to defend himself, without fear of an increased penalty.

Only consolation out of this is that I think Hogan was playing sore, so he gets time to get his body right. He could have aggravated an injury if he kept playing.

I agree with most observations on here. It is the inconsistency of the MRP which is in question here. Both Hogan and Lewis perpetrated stupid acts, no doubt. However, the nature by which the MRP review the facts is at best arbitrary. How can any reasonable person come to the conclusion which they have apparently come to,without a thorough examination of the facts? To simply decide based on video evidence is ridiculous and dubious medical reports is a travesty, which results in impacting on a professional sportsman's livelihood. There is no way you can determine the level of impact and severity by remotely observing the incidents concerned. Will Cripps play this week? Will Rowe be subject to the concussion rules? Remains to be seen obviously, but I would venture to suggest that the medical reports provided, which were clearly designed to provide a direct correlation between incident and injury, resulted in the severity of the penalties handed out. Without them, the penalties would have been less in my opinion. I can think of no other examination of so-called facts, which is done in such a manner, without a thorough testing of the evidence.

Contact could have occurred in any scrimmage, bump, or hitting the turf. How would anybody know otherwise. However, the reality is, this will never be tested. Anything else is just hypothesising and that is what is wrong with the entire MRP process. Summary and arbitrary.

Totally dispute that they "punched".

It is one thing to observe an incident from the stands or video footage and come up with a conclusion lacking in all of the facts. It is entirely another thing to 'hear' the case. Regardless of the jurisdiction, a kangaroo court has never served any useful purpose.

Will he play next week?

So, an opposition player can take a dive - yes, despite a stupid act - MRP reviews on the vision only. No opportunity to plead a case, speak about the nuance of the incident or the actual level of impact. Contest the MRP finding and you risk a greater sanction. Yep, makes sense to me - not

Had we been challenged this way last year, we would have lost. Yep, it was ugly and very frustrating, but we won. That is the difference this year. Let's hope the players learn from this. You cannot go into any game, thinking it's just a matter of going through the motions That is what it looked liked to me. As a side line, saw Neale Daniher after the game. While the obvious signs of MND are with him, he still looks remarkably fit and it was great to see him with his Dees scarf. He commented that he can only see this team improving over the course of 2017 and not going backwards as we did toward the end of last year.

Was it Weitering that ran up behind Lewis and pushed him in the back with force, when clearly Lewis was not expecting it? A very dangerous act. Silly from both players, but I would think for Hogan at least, given his record, he gets a fine.

Perhaps Howcroft's 'letter" was in some way cathartic for him and if so, that is understandable. As dark as those days were, Dean Bailey did a fine job under the circumstances, but he was obviously undermined on a continual basis. In terms of "186' and why the players let it happen? I suspect the players knew that DB had, at least, one hand tied behind his back and a pervading culture that top 10 draft picks would fix all our ills. The players had had enough of the machinations of the footy department as it was then. Anyway, it is all done now. RIP Dean.

Etihad, Saints. 4 goals down and won by 5. When was the last time we did that? Savour the win. Next hoodoo to broken? No longer Carlton''s biartch.

There were a few on here that said we would lose. Who were they again?

To you and Rossco. You guys are inspirations. Thank you for sharing. Our footy team only need to look to you guys for inner strength. My thoughts are with you and on game days, I will think of you both again.

Once again, headlines belie the truth of the story. The Age headline says "Nathan Jones miffed by Melbourne Demons' captaincy move " He was "disappointed" and "frustrated", but he clearly is accepting of it and looks ahead. So, to err is human, but to express yourself is a cardinal sin? Once again, just bad journalism.

I know it is with the benefit of hindsight, but makes a case that we should have kept Lumumba on the list, then placed him on long term injury and upgraded a rookie

Gestalt!!!!!

At last some reason. 16 days to go. Another team, a different attitude with 4 points at stake. I am not panicking at all.

A win tonight and this may just keep going. Fingers crossed and............ yes, no injuries. 34012

Melbourne FC‏Verified account @melbournefc 2m2 minutes ago INJURY UPDATE | Aaron vandenBerg will miss the start of the season due to a stress fracture in his heel.