MRP / Trib. Vickery Gets 4 Weeks - Back for Round 23

[GetDimmaBack]

Malthouse's playing days were before my time mate.



Nice try. One type of provocation is now recognised as being disgraceful behaviour resulting in serious consequences. The other is something that ruckmen do all the time, according to one highly-rated ruckman I have seen quoted on the issue, and was considered to be unworthy of either a free kick (by the controlling umpire, who can be heard saying "Nah no free" or words to that effect) and by the MRP who considered it below the force required for a report.

Hang on - Nicky Winmar, Gilbert McAdam, Les Bamblett, Syd Jackson, the Krakoeur brothers and all of the other indigenous didn't resort to the nastiness of Lewis.

You complain that Vickery should have just copped it.

Folliowing that line of argument, shouldn't Lewis have done the same?

 

[Tiger71]

Malthouse's playing days were before my time mate.



Nice try. One type of provocation is now recognised as being disgraceful behaviour resulting in serious consequences. The other is something that ruckmen do all the time, according to one highly-rated ruckman I have seen quoted on the issue, and was considered to be unworthy of either a free kick (by the controlling umpire, who can be heard saying "Nah no free" or words to that effect) and by the MRP who considered it below the force required for a report.

Nice try mate but your thinking is flawed.

Ruckmen do not throw elbow in the guts of opposition, well good ones dont and thats simple due to not wanting to risk a free kick at a stoppage. Could you link ivans remark ? as i could not find it anywhere where he said, all ruckmen throw elbows against opposition who are not ready for contact. It also was not considered unworthy, the umpire was wrong in not paying a free kick

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Hang on - Nicky Winmar, Gilbert McAdam, Les Bamblett, Syd Jackson, the Krakoeur brothers and all of the other indigenous didn't resort to the nastiness of Lewis.

You complain that Vickery should have just copped it.

Folliowing that line of argument, shouldn't Lewis have done the same?

I'm not trying to argue that Vickery should have just copped it. But if he wanted to retaliate there were better ways to do it than cold-cocking an unsuspecting Cox with a right to the jaw.

 

[richoatthedisco]

I'm saying the majority of his suspensions came when he retaliated against provocation, yes.

How is all of this relevant to Vickery?

Vickery retaliated to provocation.

can we have our board back?

GetDimmaBack is always welcome.

Nice try. One type of provocation is now recognised as being disgraceful behaviour resulting in serious consequences. The other is something that ruckmen do all the time, according to one highly-rated ruckman I have seen quoted on the issue, and was considered to be unworthy of either a free kick (by the controlling umpire, who can be heard saying "Nah no free" or words to that effect) and by the MRP who considered it below the force required for a report.

Name-calling is disgraceful but elbows to the ribs are part of the game. Yeah, ok.

The umpire should have paid a free kick to Vickery. It was an off-the-ball strike, a no-brainer. If he had, Vickery would not have hit Cox. If Cox had not elbowed Vickery, Vickery would not have hit Cox.

Vickery's action was dumb, crude and got what it deserved at the tribunal, but to claim it was not a reaction to provocation is disingenuous bullshit that strips you of all credibility.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Nice try mate but your thinking is flawed.

Ruckmen do not throw elbow in the guts of opposition, well good ones dont and thats simple due to not wanting to risk a free kick at a stoppage. Could you link ivans remark ? as i could not find it anywhere where he said, all ruckmen throw elbows against opposition who are not ready for contact. It also was not considered unworthy, the umpire was wrong in not paying a free kick

"When you're in the ruck you're constantly elbowing and bumping, which we love as ruckman," Maric told radio 3AW

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...on-dean-cox-20140726-zx5v8.html#ixzz38vu5rFJf

 

[Eagle87]

Hang on - Nicky Winmar, Gilbert McAdam, Les Bamblett, Syd Jackson, the Krakoeur brothers and all of the other indigenous didn't resort to the nastiness of Lewis.

You complain that Vickery should have just copped it.

Folliowing that line of argument, shouldn't Lewis have done the same?

Quite apart from the fact that your post is factually inaccurate, the fact the guys like Lewis & Winmar reacted badly to it and didn't just cop it on the chin should be applauded ...

I guess your still annoyed with those uppity women causing civil unrest to win the vote? I mean if they'd just known their place.

Lewis had a shorter fuse than some. But when Des Headland had a 6 week offence thrown out on appeal because the provocation was "so bad" it made me wonder what might have happened with Lewis in an earlier age and how much different the AFL might have viewed Todd Viney if his words that day that he went the eye gouge on Lewis, got a finger in his mouth then bitched like a girl when Lewis closed said mouth...

"you should be in prison like the rest of the black campaigners" or words to that affect might have coloured the outcome in Lewis' favour and Lewy copped worse every week. Ask Nicky Winmar what he put up with ...

Not excusing Lewis actions but, frankly, we would today if the things said to him were allowed ...

And it was miles worse in Victoria. The joys of having piss poured on one as they walked into Victoria Park accompanied by monkey noises for Lewis was just awesome ...

But yes, this all has nothing to do with Vickery ...

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Name-calling is disgraceful but elbows to the ribs are part of the game. Yeah, ok.

The umpire should have paid a free kick to Vickery. It was an off-the-ball strike, a no-brainer. If he had, Vickery would not have hit Cox. If Cox had not elbowed Vickery, Vickery would not have hit Cox.

Vickery's action was dumb, crude and got what it deserved at the tribunal, but to claim it was not a reaction to provocation is disingenuous bullshit that strips you of all credibility.

I didn't claim it was not a reaction to provocation. It was an unjustified and disproportionate reaction to a relatively slight provocation.

Attempting to equate elbowing in a ruck contest to racial vilification does nothing to aid your credibility either, just quietly.

 

[Keys]

Put simply if Vickery had responded with an elbow of his own to Cox nobody would be batting an eyelid.

Instead he chose to take a roundhouse swipe (not a king hit) and struck Cox hard enough that he was knocked out and took no further part in the game

 

[Tiger Toffee]

Am I on the Richmond board or the MRP board.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Put simply if Vickery had responded with an elbow of his own to Cox nobody would be batting an eyelid.

Instead he chose to take a roundhouse swipe (not a king hit) and struck Cox hard enough that he was knocked out and took no further part in the game

thank you - about time someone got this 100% right

 

[Ned_Flanders]

"When you're in the ruck you're constantly elbowing and bumping, which we love as ruckman," Maric told radio 3AW

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...on-dean-cox-20140726-zx5v8.html#ixzz38vu5rFJf

I know you love quoting that, but its what Maric likes, not what is legal

Plenty of actions by players that they like and are happy to engage in have been prohibited by the league (ie sliding, the bump). just because they like it though doesn't mean it was appropriate or legal

FWIW the umpiring of ruck contests is a joke these days IMO. too inconsistent, and too often the monster rucks are all over their opponent for no sanction (ie Sandilands)

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I know you love quoting that, but its what Maric likes, not what is legal

Plenty of actions by players that they like and are happy to engage in have been prohibited by the league (ie sliding, the bump). just because they like it though doesn't mean it was appropriate or legal

That's a stretch. He said "we" (i.e. ruckmen) are "constantly" elbowing.

Actually I'm not too sure why we're arguing. I agree with Keyser Soze's assessment and so do you. Vickery got hit with an elbow and was entitled to retaliate, but not by punching Cox in the jaw.

 

[richoatthedisco]

I'm not trying to argue that Vickery should have just copped it. But if he wanted to retaliate there were better ways to do it than cold-cocking an unsuspecting Cox with a right to the jaw.

How could Cox possibly have been unsuspecting? He had just elbowed Vickery - any rational person would expect a reaction and I'm sure he did too.

Cox threw the elbow not just to hurt and intimidate Vickery, but to gain an edge in the ruck contest and/or draw a reaction to gain a free kick. As evidenced by his dive out of an earlier ruck contest (at which the umpire all but laughed), Cox had been reduced to playing for frees, as he couldn't get near it otherwise.

Did he expect to get knocked out? No. Did Vickery expect or intend to knock him out? No. But he did, so he cops four weeks.

What I find hilarious is the West Coast outrage that Cox was an innocent victim, when he started the whole thing. He wanted Vickery to retaliate; be careful what you wish for.

I didn't claim it was not a reaction to provocation. It was an unjustified and disproportionate reaction to a relatively slight provocation.

Attempting to equate elbowing in a ruck contest to racial vilification does nothing to aid your credibility either, just quietly.

The elbow was before the ruck contest, not in it. I did not equate it to racial vilification. They are entirely different forms of provocation.

Most Tigers agree what Ty did was wrong but we won't cop that Cox was a blameless victim.

 

[tigerwill]

"When you're in the ruck you're constantly elbowing and bumping, which we love as ruckman," Maric told radio 3AW

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...on-dean-cox-20140726-zx5v8.html#ixzz38vu5rFJf

Seeing you plucked a quote to suit yourself.
Does he mention he doesn't mind being elbowed in the guts off the ball before any ruck contest takes place?
For me, he refers to the actual ruck contest, big difference.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

How could Cox possibly have been unsuspecting? He had just elbowed Vickery - any rational person would expect a reaction and I'm sure he did too.

He may have expected a reaction, but not in the form of a punch to the head.

Cox threw the elbow not just to hurt and intimidate Vickery, but to gain an edge in the ruck contest and/or draw a reaction to gain a free kick. As evidenced by his dive out of an earlier ruck contest (at which the umpire all but laughed), Cox had been reduced to playing for frees, as he couldn't get near it otherwise.

He couldn't get near it, apart from his 18 hitouts in a bit less than a half? Compared to Vickery's 9 for the game.

Did he expect to get knocked out? No. Did Vickery expect or intend to knock him out? No. But he did, so he cops four weeks.

Any time you aim a punch at an opponent's head, particularly when they're not looking for it, you should probably have a reasonable expectation that knocking them out is a potential outcome.

The elbow was before the ruck contest, not in it. I did not equate it to racial vilification. They are entirely different forms of provocation.

They certainly are. You equated racial vilification to "name-calling" and suggested that the Chris Lewis discussion was relevant to Vickery because both had been provoked.

Most Tigers agree what Ty did was wrong but we won't cop that Cox was a blameless victim.

Define blameless? I've said Vickery had a right to retaliate to the elbow to the chest.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Seeing you plucked a quote to suit yourself.
Does he mention he doesn't mind being elbowed in the guts off the ball before any ruck contest takes place?
For me, he refers to the actual ruck contest, big difference.

Fair go, it was the one Maric quote the article chose to print. I haven't heard the full audio of his interview so I can only use the quotes available.

You're splitting hairs. Does the "actual ruck contest" start when the two rucks line up against each other, or when the umpire released the ball, or when it's on its downward trajectory...?

 

[GetDimmaBack]

Quite apart from the fact that your post is factually inaccurate, the fact the guys like Lewis & Winmar reacted badly to it and didn't just cop it on the chin should be applauded ...

I guess your still annoyed with those uppity women causing civil unrest to win the vote? I mean if they'd just known their place.

Lewis had a shorter fuse than some. But when Des Headland had a 6 week offence thrown out on appeal because the provocation was "so bad" it made me wonder what might have happened with Lewis in an earlier age and how much different the AFL might have viewed Todd Viney if his words that day that he went the eye gouge on Lewis, got a finger in his mouth then bitched like a girl when Lewis closed said mouth...

"you should be in prison like the rest of the black campaigners" or words to that affect might have coloured the outcome in Lewis' favour and Lewy copped worse every week. Ask Nicky Winmar what he put up with ...

Not excusing Lewis actions but, frankly, we would today if the things said to him were allowed ...

And it was miles worse in Victoria. The joys of having piss poured on one as they walked into Victoria Park accompanied by monkey noises for Lewis was just awesome ...

But yes, this all has nothing to do with Vickery ...

Man, you are an angry (big) bird.

You're putting words in my mouth, and you have zero right to do that, your honour.

Lewis was guilty of a few dog acts - no bones about it. What did the other indigenous boys do to equal him? Why is Lewis still thought badly of today?

Of course it's not to be tolerated today, and never should have been. But that doesn't excuse some of the vile things that Lewis did.

As for what happened to you in Victoria, did you ever go to a game at the WACA or Subiaco as an opposition supporter in the early '90s? Pot. Kettle. Black. Baby!


So, what's your thing about the Suffragettes? I didn't get that at all...

 

[tigerwill]

Fair go, it was the one Maric quote the article chose to print. I haven't heard the full audio of his interview so I can only use the quotes available.

You're splitting hairs. Does the "actual ruck contest" start when the two rucks line up against each other, or when the umpire released the ball, or when it's on its downward trajectory...?

Not splitting hairs at all. You're referring to Marics comments which relate to an actual ruck contest.
Cox elbowed Vickery well before the ruck contest. So it was a bit farcical to compare Marics comments as a defence for Cox's elbow to Vickery.
As to "ruck contest" look up the AFL Rule book for the definition. Not that that's always followed. As we saw in this instance.

There is also a big big difference with "elbowing and bumping" and being struck with an elbow

 

[Eagle87]

Man, you are an angry (big) bird.

You're putting words in my mouth, and you have zero right to do that, your honour.

Lewis was guilty of a few dog acts - no bones about it. What did the other indigenous boys do to equal him? Why is Lewis still thought badly of today?

Of course it's not to be tolerated today, and never should have been. But that doesn't excuse some of the vile things that Lewis did.

As for what happened to you in Victoria, did you ever go to a game at the WACA or Subiaco in the early '90s? Pot. Kettle. Black. Baby!


So, what's your thing about the Suffragettes? I didn't get that at all...

I'm unsurprised you didn't get it.

Lewis is a champion of our club. One of the finest indigenous players to have played. How you choose to remember him is up to you. Even Dermott in his "I was a racist" confession admits they went beyond the pail.

To be honest, as my Headland example demonstrated, the things said to Lewis do excuse what he did. Or would if he'd been born 15 years later. That's kinda the point. The trailblazers always suffer.

I've been an Eagles member since day 1. Comparing a game in 1990 at the WACA/Subi to those w***ers at Victoria Park is reinventing history ...

Not angry. Just suffer fools and the uninformed badly

 

[Ned_Flanders]

That's a stretch. He said "we" (i.e. ruckmen) are "constantly" elbowing.

Actually I'm not too sure why we're arguing. I agree with Keyser Soze's assessment and so do you. Vickery got hit with an elbow and was entitled to retaliate, but not by punching Cox in the jaw.

only disagreement is the idea that the elbow is kosher, its not, its just that the umps have lost control of ruck contests for years now, and this shit has stupidly been allowed to go on. Same as the holding, and the other restraining tactics used.

Im not saying cox does it solely, most do, because they know they can get away with it

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Not splitting hairs at all. You're referring to Marics comments which relate to an actual ruck contest.
Cox elbowed Vickery well before the ruck contest. So it was a bit farcical to compare Marics comments as a defence for Cox's elbow to Vickery.
As to "ruck contest" look up the AFL Rule book for the definition. Not that that's always followed. As we saw in this instance.

There is also a big big difference with "elbowing and wrestling" and being struck with an elbow

Again, I've only got the one line quote from Maric so I didn't read the part where he qualifies his statement "when you're in the ruck" to mean "when you're in a ruck contest as defined by the AFL Rule Book".

There's a big difference between "elbowing" and "being struck with an elbow"?

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

only disagreement is the idea that the elbow is kosher, its not, its just that the umps have lost control of ruck contests for years now, and this shit has stupidly been allowed to go on. Same as the holding, and the other restraining tactics used.

Im not saying cox does it solely, most do, because they know they can get away with it

If the ump had paid a free kick against Cox I probably wouldn't have complained. Well I would have complained, but two days later when I'd calmed down I would have admitted the free might have been there.

 

[GetDimmaBack]

I'm unsurprised you didn't get it.

Lewis is a champion of our club. One of the finest indigenous players to have played. How you choose to remember him is up to you. Even Dermott in his "I was a racist" confession admits they went beyond the pail.

To be honest, as my Headland example demonstrated, the things said to Lewis do excuse what he did. Or would if he'd been born 15 years later. That's kinda the point. The trailblazers always suffer.

I've been an Eagles member since day 1. Comparing a game in 1990 at the WACA/Subi to those ******s at Victoria Park is reinventing history ...

Not angry. Just suffer fools and the uninformed badly

Lewis was a thug. Remember him how you want, but try to do it without the rose coloured glasses. I say he was a thug, you say he was a "trailblazer". Okay...

Nothing excuses biting another player. Not even in the role of "trailblazer".

Regarding Vic Park, I went there many times, as a Dogs supporter, and never had a problem.
The WACA or Subi, (can't remember which now), however, was another story. Maybe because it was a game the Dogs won...

I haven't been back. I'm no longer angry. I just don't suffer fools and imbeciles gladly.



So, what was your point about the Suffragettes?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

If the ump had paid a free kick against Cox I probably wouldn't have complained. Well I would have complained, but two days later when I'd calmed down I would have admitted the free might have been there.

for me its a completely separate issue, but one that bugs me. When you look at how much Sandilands gets away with, Id like to know why the umps dont call him out more

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I just don't suffer fools and imbeciles gladly.

In other circumstances, you and Eagle87 would get along like a house on fire!