MRP / Trib. Douglas suspended for 2 games (With subsequent discussion on Viney bump)

[Damp Squarie]

I don't see what all the uproar is about; the MRP had to suspend him if they are being consistent.
I thought he'd get 4 matches but Lynch was bumped / pushed / tripped into Viney so therefore penalty reduced.

The thing that worries me about rule changes that are changing the fabric of the game is:
1. Doing it on the fly
2. What happens when the player is concussed in another manner?
e.g. A few people on here may recall (some of you probably weren't born) when Radar was kneed in the back of the head by Tarrant (Pies) in a marking contest - Wizard Cup game I think...he was concussed...so that that mean Tarrant is suspended...geez I hope not, but I can see this getting very messy.

 

[DD#23]

Noone is disputing the head needs to be protected. I have been a huge supporter of that for many years. What is being disputed is whether some accidents are inevitable in a contact sport played at a milliont miles an hour. The Viney incident is a grey area in that balance IMO.

No but the difference is in the choices they had. Douglas had a whole range of choices, Viney had very few, some say none.

I know there wasn't much else Viney could have done, but he collected the head, case closed. 2 inches lower on Lynch's shoulder and he might have gotten away with it. That's his other option.

 

[JP Sauce]

Secondly, on this event, you cannot, on one hand, say Viney did not bump, and then shout from the rooftops THE BUMP IS DEAD. It either was or wasn't a bump, people.

That's an excellent point. Either "THE BUMP IS DEAD!!!" and he gets 2 (should be 4) weeks or it wasn't a bump and the bump is still alive.

Thirdly, the fact he was found guilty, and then graded as medium impact is a bigger farce than him being suspended in the first place. The precedent set here has dug an even BIGGER hole for the AFL. If a broken jaw, on the side the shoulder made contact, is medium impact, then what is high/severe? Decapitation?

Douglas should've gone in way harder and broken Ward's jaw - he would've got 3 down to maybe 1.

 

[The Mighty Boosh]

That's hyperbole and everyone knows it. People said it after the Ziebell incident a few years back and the Trengove one as well.

If you haven't noticed the game has changed. It happens slowly so most just accept it. I agree with protecting the head but accidents occur and when players have little option but to avoid a contest entirely on the chance there may be an injury then we are no longer a contact sport.

I've said this in multiple posts now that Viney had the entire sequence of play to adapt and react. He knew that Lynch & Georgiou were coming for seconds before it became an issue. Lynch took control right before it happened. But he didn't have bump him, he wasn't bracing. Bracing doesn't happen when you are continuing the forward motion. He bumped, messed it up and got rightfully suspended for it. Your issue is with the rules themselves not the verdict.

This is the fundamental difference in our viewing of it. I don't think Viney attempted a bump. He braced for impact at the last second. He either squibbed it before the ball had been won or he goes in hard to win it. You say you have played the game, it is impossible to stop in half a second when you are running full pelt. You can brace while still propelled forward by momentum. He didn't attempt a bump on lynch he braced, protected himself and won the ball.

Without having footage of your sensationalist 'incidents'.

Neither of them are bumps or anything close to this circumstance. I am getting sick of telling people who can't comprehend the rules why they are wrong about the Viney decision. I refuse to get into debate about your fan fiction.

You've been arguing the letter of the law so seeing the incident is irrelevant. Surely you can conceive of how these rules could be interpreted wrongly to the detriment of the game. THe viney incident is such an interpretation.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Haha! Crow-eater spot on.

Viney did NOT bump, he was just bracing himself for inevitable contact.

Then suspended.

Nekminit...

The bump is DEAD!!!!!

 

[Mattrox]

Still is, just hitting someone in the head for any reason isn't legal.

If you bump someone and they fall into the knee of the other player (or hit their head on the ground) is not hitting someone in the head.

 

[Vader]

No but the difference is in the choices they had. Douglas had a whole range of choices, Viney had very few, some say none.

I accept that. I was just pointing out that being "on" or "off" the ball is not relevant when considering a "rough conduct" charge.

 

[PKnox]

Lol at the outcry from current and former players and coaches. When it comes to head injuries, concussion and brain damage it is not the players we should be consulting but the medical experts who are predicting grave things for our players if their heads and brains are not protected.

Of course Dermott is decrying this decision - he built a career on hurting his opponents. If the AFL is going to move forward, look after its players and avoid costly litigation in future, they need to stamp out conduct like this.

 

[PureFooty]

I don't mean to brag, but I never played football at the highest level and I was able to execute the spinning move Gleeson brought up in those split second time frames. I actually called it too before they brought it up at the tribunal, but that's not adding to the argument, I just think I'm awesome for knowing they would.

Look man, no one who is passionate about the integrity of football wants to see someone suspended for this, however, when clubs were asked whether or not players should be accountable for contact made to the head in a bumping situation, regardless of how it occurred, 85% of the clubs said they should be held accountable. The truth is and it's a bitter pill to swallow, as over the top as it seems, other options were available to Viney. Now if the argument is that those other options available are BS for a variety of reasons then I'm on your side. But the rule is in place that does not take that into account. That makes for a stupid rule, it doesn't mean they're actually incorrect in the way they interpreted it.

At least everyone in Victoria is up in arms about it, I barely heard a whimper of support for Douglas when his incident happened from across the border. The fact that a broken jaw equates to medium impact proves there was some sympathy from the tribunal, so it hasn't gone 100% against you even though it may feel like it has.

Douglas got 2 weeks because what he did was bump a man, to the letter of the law, a man who was not within the 5 metres of the ball carrier, and to be honest had no real intent to infringe on the ball carrier. Douglas could see that, he lined him up, he picked him off, unfortunately he concussed him. I'm sure he didn't want to knock him out, but he did. The decision he made was as clear as day. Viney on the other hand, has to be given the benefit of the doubt, he's going for the ball, at full speed. He braces himself once he realised he wouldn't get to it first, and he collided with Lynch. He did break his jaw, but it was just one of those accidents that happen in footy. Also the 85% players who agreed that players should be accountable for contact made in the bumping situation, more suits the Douglas scenario then the Viney one. The fact is they are 2 completely different incidents which somehow resulted in the same amount of weeks on the sideline. Douglas chose to do what he did, I'm not sure Viney had a completely legitimate chance to do anything else. Maybe he could have spun out, but maybe he couldn't have. Also, it was medium level impact because Georgiou contributed to the force, how know one understands that is surprising.

Onto your spinning move, I'm not really sure that's something to brag about to be honest. And the fact that I highly doubt you play at the pace at which AFL is played, and at which Viney attacked the footy, it holds no relevance to the incident.

 

[The Big Sauce]

If you haven't noticed the game has changed. It happens slowly so most just accept it. I agree with protecting the head but accidents occur and when players have little option but to avoid a contest entirely on the chance there may be an injury then we are no longer a contact sport.

He had options, the only way Viney is getting off is if he can prove that he had absolutely no other options available to him given the circumstances. Which simply isn't the case, he had a small number of options, they weren't all desirable. But he chose to go for the bump and that's his mistake to live with.

This is the fundamental difference in our viewing of it. I don't think Viney attempted a bump. He braced for impact at the last second. He either squibbed it before the ball had been won or he goes in hard to win it. You say you have played the game, it is impossible to stop in half a second when you are running full pelt. You can brace while still propelled forward by momentum. He didn't attempt a bump on lynch he braced, protected himself and won the ball.

It is impossible to stop at full pelt, but it's not impossible to change direction. Or throw your arms up and use Lynch's momentum in a tackle. I've had situations where I've tried to tackle head on and eaten dirt or managed to stick the tackle and get them holding the ball.

He bumped and not braced which broke a guy's jaw and the only reason he won the ball is because of the impact that he caused to Lynch's face which jolted the ball free.

You've been arguing the letter of the law so seeing the incident is irrelevant. Surely you can conceive of how these rules could be interpreted wrongly to the detriment of the game. THe viney incident is such an interpretation.

Seeing the incident is very relevant actually, you need to see the incident to work out the suspension itself or even if it is suspension worthy. Every incident is different and yes rules can be interpreted wrong. But this simply isn't one of those cases. He bumped and collected a player's jaw and pays the price.

I've spent far too long debating the merits of this now. Those who are aware of the rules were surprised that he was found guilty, this isn't a cause for mass outrage.

So I'm happy to agree to disagree.

 

[The Mighty Boosh]

If you look at this first picture you would agree the ball is in dispute. The players are running hard to contest it. Note the time stamp.

Now check the second picture and the time. Things on the footy field happen in a fraction of a second. This decision will only lead to players further second guessing themselves and contesting the ball.

 

[The Big Sauce]

If you look at this first picture you would agree the ball is in dispute. The players are running hard to contest it. Note the time stamp.

Except that Lynch wins possession.

The AFL will always look to protect the ball carrier's head. As they should.

Again nothing malicious or anything like that. But still suspension worthy.

 

[The Mighty Boosh]

Except that Lynch wins possession.

The AFL will always look to protect the ball carrier's head. As they should.

Again nothing malicious or anything like that. But still suspension worthy.

It didn't come in to possession until a fraction of a second before the collision. If he'd had a clean possession with time it is different. BUt the above images show half a second between them running at the ball and impact. He collected it somewhere in between there. And the ball could have bounced in JV's favour. For what reason should he pull out of the contest? It was an accident.

 

[Hank93]

You could very much argue that Viney changed direction because the ball bounced in that direction.

The ball bounced to the left of it's original path like a leg spin delivery.

Viney is following the ball the whole way, the ball bounces slightly left so he instinctively follows the ball.

The ball lands in Lynch's arms cleanly, so what does he do now? Tackle and risk damage to his own body? Very unlikely.

If Lynch was a Melbourne player, would Viney have charged for the ball at the same speed as he did in this case? Unlikely, cause a Melbourne player collecting the ball in Lynch's position is a better play for Melbourne than Viney getting the ball.

 

[The Big Sauce]

It didn't come in to possession until a fraction of a second before the collision. If he'd had a clean possession with time it is different. BUt the above images show half a second between them running at the ball and impact. He collected it somewhere in between there.

He had possession and Viney shouldn't have bumped it is as simple as that.

You can try and mount a huge case like this is the biggest travesty in the game but it really isn't.

A good kid accidentally hurt another player doing something reckless.

Now I am legitimately bowing out of this conversation for a bit so you'll have to engage someone else.

I wish Melbourne all the best with their season but I don't see them overturning the decision.

 

[Hank93]

If you look at this first picture you would agree the ball is in dispute. The players are running hard to contest it. Note the time stamp.

Now check the second picture and the time. Things on the footy field happen in a fraction of a second. This decision will only lead to players further second guessing themselves and contesting the ball.

Are you part of the Melbourne coaching staff? How do you have access to this program???

 

[feenix67]

Yes. Shit rule is still a rule. Because he hit his shoulder first it would lessen the grading I assume, probably to negligent instead of reckless.

1 week on grading, maybe 2 depending on the medical report, and grand total 0 minutes coverage from the Victorian media for 0 minutes of hysteria outside of this board. Everyone moves on, we are pissed about it, Grigg gets a full game next week.

Would it be the first time a bloke with the ball in his hand got suspended?

 

[The Mighty Boosh]

Are you part of the Melbourne coaching staff? How do you have access to this program???

It was posted on the Dees board by a member of our coaching staff team.

 

[Mattrox]

0.56 of a second is still quite a long time to react.


Sent from my GT-I9295 using Tapatalk

 

[The Mighty Boosh]

0.56 of a second is still quite a long time to react.


Sent from my GT-I9295 using Tapatalk

That's hundreths of a second. Half a second. Half a second between the first picture and the second. In the first picture he was still contesting the ball and a good chance to take possession. Lynch took possession between there - perhaps a quarter of a second until impact. with all that momentum it's not as much time as you suggest.

 

[Vader]

0.56 of a second is still quite a long time to react.

Significantly more than a batsman gets, when facing a fast bowler. Time enough for an olympic sprinter to run 6 or 7m - Viney should be capable of covering at least 4m in the same period.

Let's not forget that the incident didn't happen in complete isolation either. There was a build-up to it, with Viney, Lynch & Georgiou all approaching the ball. Viney would have been considering his options long before that last 0.56 seconds.

 

[MattyB_76]

Can someone explain the difference between a bump and a brace. (and possibly the similarities) I think the only difference is 'intent'.

And secondly, if Viney can't react to visual and audible stimuli at the same level as the average NCAA footballer (studies estimate 0.2 seconds) he shouldn't be playing AFL football and should stop considering himself and inside midfielder.

Lastly if Viney is really #ashardasacatshead like some Melbourne supporters think, he wouldn't be so worried about 2 players coming at him, and tackling both should be a walk in the park.

 

[beartoo]

As an aside looking at those photos...Viney seems to have propped in the 1st and looks as though he's intent on keeping Dangerfield out of the play. If so, he makes a split-second decision to go for Lynch and maybe arrives a tad later than he might have. Might have taken possession himself if he'd gone for the pill.
Lynch was being tackled from behind and Viney comes in head on. Dangerous, reckless, whatever you want to call it and worthy of suspension however the Ds faithful and the Vic commentators spin it.

 

[Mattrox]

That's hundreths of a second. Half a second. Half a second between the first picture and the second. In the first picture he was still contesting the ball and a good chance to take possession. Lynch took possession between there - perhaps a quarter of a second until impact. with all that momentum it's not as much time as you suggest.

He's square on to the oncoming ball, he has therefore checked his speed.

2 other players are contesting, heading straight for him.

He has 3 options,

squib and avoid contact - Current AFL preferred option

brace for a tackle

stay put and be involved in a collision.

The fact that he has squared up prior to contact means he has already committed to this action prior to the .56 seconds starting. So infact he had more time to decide a course of action.

When you square up to a contest where 2 people are headed straight for you there is only 1 possible out come if you don't reconsider in the 0.56 seconds left.

I'm not saying I agree with the rules. But Ziebell rubbed out 3 times iirc, a couple were dubious. This one is equal of those although I'm not claiming exactly the same circumstances. There is a huge uproar now. The only reason why that I can think of is it invoves the favorite son of a favorite son at a club that is stuggling so the sympathy factor is high. But according to the rules he is negligent. From there it becomes a foregone conclusion that he gets games. He even got "medium impact" which itself is a farce.

It is not accidental contact because he squared up for contact prior to the 0.56 seconds (which is plenty of time to bail out).



Sent from my GT-I9295 using Tapatalk

 

[The Karma Bus]

Another thing I find interesting is how some are saying Viney didn't tackle because he saw two 100kg beasts coming at him and he would have got injured if he did..

I thought he had no time at all to compute anything, make a decision on anything etc?
Fair bit of time to not only notice a guy coming at him, but that there was another behind him, they were both 100kg hulks (both are actually in the 80's for kg's), if he tackles he will get injured, so he won't tackle and will brace instead..

You see many tackles with a player meeting another head on like that, surprised people are saying he was and should have been so scared to tackle..