Jack Viney

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Armadeo said:
Does anyone know what time the Tribunal starts tonight?


I fear you are right. I'm not really subscribing to bump vs brace argument as I think they are the same thing. Viney never really stopped, he slowed down and changed direction towards Lynch and Georgiou and at some point realised that he could not contest the ball and turned and braced with his shoulder. Unfortunately for Lynch his momentum from Georgiou and pinned arm caused him and Viney to collide and Lynch ending up second best with Georgiou shortly behind.

The questions is who is at fault and who has to make the decision of what is a safe and not reportable course of action. I know when I play sport it is 95% instinct and muscle memory at all times and very rarely do I have time to access things with logic. The AFL are obviously trying to make players a lot more accountable without taking this into account and drive the game into a safer place whilst somehow keeping the physicality.

Either players need to learn to adapt and change their play style or the AFL need to tweak their rules. At the moment if you bump and someone gets caught high or heads clash you are in trouble. The question in this case is did Viney elect to bump (definition pending)? If so, could he have reasonably foreseen that high actions would have caused this. I would not want to be the Tribunal tonight that is for sure.

For the record I have kept my personal preference for the direction of the game and its rules out of this as I find it irrelevant when discussing the facts of what information we have.
Click to expand...


A bump requires the offending party to take steps to deliberately and/or violently cause a collision. To brace is to steady oneself in order to mitigate the damage from a collision.

Hysterical, illogical Adelaide fans will have you believe that Viney is guilty of the former. The video shows, and Melbourne will argue that Viney did the latter.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

butters88 said:
I've seen a shed load more whinging coming from Camry Crows fans, every second post from Crows fans has been "But, but, but Douglas g g g got f f f four weeks f f f for his h h h hit which w w w was the same. AFL only l l loo looks after Vic clubs"
Click to expand...
Sorry, I forget the part where I mentioned Douglas in my comment?
 
The Cryptkeeper said:
A bump requires the offending party to take steps to deliberately and/or violently cause a collision. To brace is to steady oneself in order to mitigate the damage from a collision.

Hysterical, illogical Adelaide fans will have you believe that Viney is guilty of the former. The video shows, and Melbourne will argue that Viney did the latter.
Click to expand...

Sounds logical but is that what you think or is it how the Tribunal sees it?
 
PKnox said:
I'm suggesting that it is in dispute.
Click to expand...


It is absolutely not in dispute if you understand what the word "bump" means and you also undertsand the difference between "bumping" and "bracing."

Did the Jack Viney make any attempt to consciously collide with the Adelaide player? No.

Did Jack Viney brace himself as two players came at him at pace? Yes.
 
Last warning.

Cut out the abuse, playing the man, and in general the trolling.

Going the ad hominem route is not an argument, it's a cop out and is weak.

People who keep it up will be earning themselves some time off.
 
The Cryptkeeper said:
It is absolutely not in dispute if you understand what the word "bump" means and you also undertsand the difference between "bumping" and "bracing."

Did the Jack Viney make any attempt to consciously collide with the Adelaide player? No.

Did Jack Viney brace himself as two players came at him at pace? Yes.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the footage or just read this thread?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ptrg said:
Question to Adelaide fans:

IF (and when) Viney is found not guilty, would you want your club to challenge the finding, or as the REST of the competition would, praise the finding and hope it becomes the standard..?
Click to expand...

If he's found not guilty, so be it.

If the reason is "the impact was out of Viney's control because Georgiou and Lynch's momentum carried them into him", or "he had no other options accept brace for impact", I'll accept it and move on, although I think they will be wrong.

But from my one-eyed view, and looking back on recent history (circa 2009, CryptKeeper), I don't think he'll be found not guilty.
 
The Cryptkeeper said:
A bump requires the offending party to take steps to deliberately and/or violently cause a collision. To brace is to steady oneself in order to mitigate the damage from a collision.

Hysterical, illogical Adelaide fans will have you believe that Viney is guilty of the former. The video shows, and Melbourne will argue that Viney did the latter.
Click to expand...

... mitigate the damage to themselves. Explain to me how tensing up the muscles in your arms and legs softens the impact for the other person? If both people are braced for impact, then yes, it will minimise the damage.
 
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-04-27/gibson-on-report
Gibson got off for this.

Lids goes for a little tickler which hardly touched Stokes and gets TWO WEEKS and he was pushed in the back beforehand(no free of course and then reacts but was in front of Stokes so didn't have intention of knowing where Stokes or whoever was!!!

AFL is a JOKE!


Absolute JOKE!
 
PKnox said:
I could read that post another 1000 times and it'd still be the pathetic school boy ramblings which drag this website to new depths.
Click to expand...
As opposed to the playground antics of "But he got this and I didn't and it's not faaaaaiiirrrrr:(
 
ptrg said:
champaign. after our great win last weekend where we beat a team at their home ground, resulting in a 100% win ratio there. Yay.
Click to expand...
Not against Port (2011)..sorry to rain on your parade. However 100% against the Crows :)

edit: willydave beat me to it
 
Radio's been mentioning Whitecross on Selwood in 2012 being very similar. Anyone got that anywhere?
 
smasha said:
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-04-27/gibson-on-report
Gibson got off for this.

Lids goes for a little tickler which hardly touched Stokes and gets TWO WEEKS and he was pushed in the back beforehand(no free of course and then reacts but was in front of Stokes so didn't have intention of knowing where Stokes or whoever was!!!

AFL is a JOKE!


Absolute JOKE!
Click to expand...

JUBJUB said:
and Deledio is appealing his week,risking a 2nd week

3b2ef69300ce7be6e59311ed8c4ed2bb.jpg
Click to expand...

clearly hits Stokes flush in the jaw and then has Morris charge in from the left which leads to jumper punches and ultimately his 1 week suspension.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

The Hobo
Viney hit on Boak
Replies
9
Views
863
The Hobo
The Hobo
beema limapep
  • Poll
Jack Martins punch on Blakeys jaw
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
181
Views
7K
Maddo11
Maddo11
MisterMarcus
Josh Rachele on Jack Buckley
Replies
8
Views
758
incaciawin
incaciawin

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top