Viney's Bump

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Viney's Bump

Post by Lee on Wed May 07, 2014 10:05 am

Lynch, broken jaw.

Viney, 2 weeks.

Fair or a bad call?

_________________
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and hence clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”– H.L. Mencken
avatar
Lee

Join date : 2011-12-05
Posts : 6871
Location : Talking footy
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by UncleHuey on Wed May 07, 2014 2:04 pm

I've changed my mind about 4 times about this. Last season I would have said that it was bad luck, play on.

But given that the Tribunal has stated that if you make contact and hit the head then you are guilty I can't see how he wouldn't get suspended.

With my Crows hat on - Lynch was the only player going for the ball. He was tackled and had his arms pinned so he couldn't protect himself. Viney chose to bump him with the point of his shoulder hitting Lynch's head so hard it not only broke his jaw but forced his head back with such force that the Melbourne tackler got concussion from the clash of heads. On that basis, he was very lucky to be graded only as moderate severity (although how a 1 week concussion is "high severity" but a 6-7 week broken jaw is moderate is beyond me), and should have been suspended.

The other argument (and the Victorians are united in this) is that Viney didn't have time to react and was only defending himself. However, this ignores the fact that Viney could have chosen to tackle not bump and given that he chose to bump he has to wear the consequences. It also doesn't appear on the video that Viney pulled up at all so he was intent on making contact of some sort.

Given the precedence set so far this season it is a fair call.

Whether Fyfe and Viney should have been reported at all is another question entirely.
avatar
UncleHuey

Join date : 2013-03-20
Posts : 1018
My club : glenelg

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Lee on Wed May 07, 2014 2:23 pm

I agree 100% with all of that.

Well said, UH.

_________________
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and hence clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”– H.L. Mencken
avatar
Lee

Join date : 2011-12-05
Posts : 6871
Location : Talking footy
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Gingernuts on Wed May 07, 2014 3:01 pm

It is a tough one.

My first instinct when I see the footage is that it's a shame that these contests now result in suspension - however.....

The rhetoric that usually comes in the wake of an incident like this usually revolves around how unlucky to bloke was who's been rubbed out.

But what about the bloke on the end of it? In this instance Lynch is going to miss 4 - 6 weeks, just when it looked like he was back on track after returning from a shoulder injury.

Likewise with concussion - who knows what long term impacts there are for one concussion, let alone multiples? Current research is far from comforting.

When you weigh it all up I really don't think it's a bad thing that the AFL is trying to remove these clashes from the game.
avatar
Gingernuts

Join date : 2012-02-01
Posts : 2493
Teams : Adelaide, Sth Adelaide, Langhorne Creek
My club : south

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Chambo Off To Work We Go on Wed May 07, 2014 3:12 pm

I looked at the video of it that was presented from 2 or 3 different angles.

Viney was running at the ball, as was Lynch.
Lynch was obviously going to get there first, and I saw Viney pull up to some degree.
There was always going to be contact so he instinctively turned sideways (probably to protect himself) and really didn't have any choice but to bump. He didn't hit Lynch's head, that was Georgiou. If Georgiou wasn't there, it would have just been play on and Lynch gets to front this week.

So what do you do? Not run into a 1 on 1 on contest to the ball?
Jump out of the way, (even if you have time)?

This is where this rule is anti-football.

Remember it was designed to stop the shirtfront and bumps off the ball when blokes didn't have time to protect themselves. But now with this precedent, it now is being used for on ball contests.

Viney had no intent (in my mind) to do other than protect himself. Things evolve in these contests so fast, you have little time to react.

If this is going to be the way the game is adjudicated, then you may as well make it netball.

Along, with the inconsistent and confusing interpretations of the other rules this season.

IE Holding the ball when it is pinned to you underneath and have no chance to get rid of it.
And yet you can be tackled, spun 360 degrees and effectively just throw or drop the pill and it is play on. Does any bugger in the afl know what they really want to adjudicate with the holding the ball rule?

And while we are at it. it seems arm chopping in marking contests is now ok.
Haven't seen one all season.

Taking the legs out in contests, well they have forgotten about that one for the most part.

They get sensible in the first few weeks by letting some of these things go in the spirit of more flow to the game. And now to the point of picking up almost nothing.

And the last one.

OK the bump seems to be dead and now you're out if you do, but only if the bloke is injured. So it is the injury rather than the action. Not sensible.

But the real rub is you can rip into a bloke and near tear his head off with a high tackle. But that is just a free kick.

Does anybody out there understand what is football and what isn't? Because there are plenty of coaches and players that are saying they have no idea.

So that ain't going to help all of us much.

Watching AFL is so frustrating because of their need to be so hopelessly inconsistent. scratch 
avatar
Chambo Off To Work We Go

Join date : 2012-02-03
Posts : 2788
My club : sturt

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Chambo Off To Work We Go on Wed May 07, 2014 3:54 pm

It is interesting reading all the comments on the afl web site newsfeed on this.
Nearly all past and current players and coaches are befuddled or disappointed in the result of this case.

One notable advocate is Leigh Matthews who at least conceded it should have been 1 week not 2. I still can't understand his rationale for this at all. Looking at his own game under these rules, Leigh would have been lucky to play 50 games he would have been rubbed out so often.
avatar
Chambo Off To Work We Go

Join date : 2012-02-03
Posts : 2788
My club : sturt

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Lee on Wed May 07, 2014 4:23 pm

I understand what you're saying, Chambo, but the media (usually the ex-players) always raise a chorus of dissent when a player is suspended for these types of incidents.

It's a hard one. I have sympathy for the player, but I also think reducing the risk of unnecessary injury is a reasonable goal.

Viney gets two weeks, probably should be one to just send a message about these clashes.

Personally, I think there should be fines, rather than suspensions, for this type of incident.


_________________
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and hence clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”– H.L. Mencken
avatar
Lee

Join date : 2011-12-05
Posts : 6871
Location : Talking footy
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Chambo Off To Work We Go on Wed May 07, 2014 4:55 pm

Read what most of those players actually said about the incident and the fact that they considered that he was protecting himself and couldn't avoid contact. A number of them talked about the alternative of jumping out of the way and the look that that would promote.

Some even spoke of blokes pulling up from contests and just waiting to respond to the other player's attack on the ball. Is that what we want to see in footy?

I understand about people being accountable, but accidents for clashes are going to happen unless you make it non-contact sport. And then they are probably still going to happen.

The more this cr@p continues, the more disillusioned I become with the whole game.

avatar
Chambo Off To Work We Go

Join date : 2012-02-03
Posts : 2788
My club : sturt

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Lee on Wed May 07, 2014 7:27 pm

The more I see the video, the more I agree with the suspension.

_________________
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and hence clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”– H.L. Mencken
avatar
Lee

Join date : 2011-12-05
Posts : 6871
Location : Talking footy
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by testy on Wed May 07, 2014 7:59 pm


Is it a contact sport or not, circa 2014 and I struggle to understand the direction the game is heading in.

Nobody wants to see a player come out of a clash with an opponent injured, both were doing what they have been instructed to do by there respective coaches, go in hard, win the ball, beat your opponent.
Viney was committed without any intent to hurt Lynch and I only hope the Melbourne Football Club appeals the decision. I saw the video and disagree with the suspension.

But this is 2014, the taxpayer pays women to have babies these days.
avatar
testy

Join date : 2012-02-02
Posts : 1432
Location : Dog House
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by bayman on Wed May 07, 2014 10:18 pm

If there was retrospective tribunal penalties handed out, what would Allan Jackovic get for head high contact when he ''collided'' with his brother Glens' head by kissing him...so what would he get ?

as for the Viney case this is just another reason i stopped going to AFL matches, it wasn't sniping, it wasn't intent to hurt etc, it was just a footy collision & it was unfortunate a injury like this was sustained..................................i've obviously have seen it on replay a few times during the week but the film stops, so what i want to know did any player remonstrate with Viney after the collision ?

i'm convinced the AFL is more worried about getting sued down the track than the actual game itself
avatar
bayman

Join date : 2012-02-05
Posts : 6742
Location : on a marx brothers set
Teams : plympton, glenelg, redbacks & whoever the money is on
My club : glenelg

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by IAmTheWarrior on Wed May 07, 2014 10:29 pm

Chambo- Viney clearly contacted Lynch as the broken Jaw was on the side that Viney was on, not on the side that Georgiou was on. I think that's probably the sole reason that he was suspended.

Personally, I have no problem with the suspension- I have no doubt there was no malice intended but the afl has said regularly over the last couple of years that if you choose to bump and there's damage to the head then you'll be suspended.
avatar
IAmTheWarrior

Join date : 2013-09-09
Posts : 239
Location : Melbourne
Teams : Woodville (now WWT), Crows, Strathfieldsaye Storm and Sunshine Kangaroos
My club : eagles

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by testy on Thu May 08, 2014 7:47 pm

The appeal was successful and Jack Viney is free to play this weekend.

Well done to the Melbourne Football Club for daring to challenge the tribunal and win the appeal, making way for there player to not carry the weight of being guilty of a ridiculous decision.
avatar
testy

Join date : 2012-02-02
Posts : 1432
Location : Dog House
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Lee on Fri May 09, 2014 9:17 am

Pro-Viney Decision:

From The Guardian


Hell hath no fury like a Melbourne supporter scorned. Not really, but they’ve been up in arms and hitting Twitter with force this week and not without reason following the quite farcical suspension of Jack Viney for his (I know they don’t want to call it this but it was) bump on Adelaide’s Tom Lynch. It wasn’t entirely unexpected that he’d feel the wrath of the tribunal, but it still sucked. It really sucked. It didn’t “tear up your membership” or “not attend a league event you probably didn’t want to go to anyway” suck, but it sucked. It’s also worth noting at this point that it sucked for Tom Lynch, too. It’s likely that he’d also rather his head hadn’t been stuck between another head and a shoulder like a melon in a vice. Them’s the breaks. Literally. But then the clouds parted and something remarkable happened. THE AFL SAID “WE WERE WRONG.” What a great result for common sense.


_________________
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and hence clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”– H.L. Mencken
avatar
Lee

Join date : 2011-12-05
Posts : 6871
Location : Talking footy
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Lee on Fri May 09, 2014 9:19 am

Anti-Viney Decision:

The Advertiser



DERMOTT Brereton can now accept his invite to the Australian Football Hall of Fame dinner next month.

Mark Ricciuto can stop being shop steward demanding the players go on strike.

Hysterical past players and fans can put away their black armbands for the death of Australian football.

But as they rejoice on the AFL appeals board dismissing the two-game ban on Melbourne mdifielder Jack Viney - for his rough conduct against Crows forward Tom Lynch at Adelaide Oval on Saturday - the game again tumbles into massive confusion on the bump.

And Lynch - who has a broken jaw and may miss as many as six games that are so critical to his wish to establish himself as a regular player in Adelaide coach Brenton Sanderson’s mind - can order another straw to sip champagne as everyone celebrates the salvation of Australian football.

From this mess must come some leadership on what the game expects from its players, the match review panel and the tribunal.

Clearly the umpires have given up as they have not been involved in ruling on any of the contentious bumps this season - not even with a free kick.

The game’s biggest name and one of the VFL’s toughest players, Leigh Matthews, summed up the Viney bump perfectly in between the tribunal and appeal hearings.

Matthews accepted Viney had a reasonable alternative as he approached Lynch.
Jack Viney cleared to play by AFL appeals board 2:26

Play video

http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/external?url=http://content4.video.news.com.au/foxsports/prod/archive/2014/05/08/DVU_080514_JULES_DE_STOOP_WRAP_ON_VINEY_DECISION_SOT.jpg&width=650&api_key=kq7wnrk4eun47vz9c5xuj3mc

Melbourne's Jack Viney has been cleared to play this weekend after the AFL appeals board overturned the two-match suspension he was handed by the tribunal.

Autoplay

On
Off

“He could have opened his arms and tackled,” Matthew said.

And until last night everyone was clear: Bumping a player while ignoring a reasonable alternative and cause a serious head injury leads to a ban.

Three experienced VFL-AFL players who served as the tribunal panel on Tuesday night did exactly as everyone has asked of the AFL judiciary.

They maintained consistency hitting Viney on the same terms they banned Nat Fyfe (Fremantle) and Richard Douglas (Adelaide) and reprimanded Daniel Giansiracusa (Western Bulldogs) for their bumps.

Now the appeals board - without explanation - has left everyone confusion, even if the majority of fans and former players are rejoicing that Viney will play against the Bulldogs at the MCG on Friday night.

Pity AFL football operations chief Mark Evans who this morning has to clean up this mess. When is a bump legal, when is it dangerous, when will a player be held to account for injuring a player after ignoring a reasonable alternative?

North Melbourne coach Brad Scott says rules should always be changed to enhance “player safety and welfare”. Tom Lynch would appreciate such.

_________________
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and hence clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”– H.L. Mencken
avatar
Lee

Join date : 2011-12-05
Posts : 6871
Location : Talking footy
My club : west

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Gingernuts on Fri May 09, 2014 10:08 am

And Lynch - who has a broken jaw and may miss as many as six games that are so critical to his wish to establish himself as a regular player in Adelaide coach Brenton Sanderson’s mind - can order another straw to sip champagne as everyone celebrates the salvation of Australian football.

 Laughing 
avatar
Gingernuts

Join date : 2012-02-01
Posts : 2493
Teams : Adelaide, Sth Adelaide, Langhorne Creek
My club : south

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by UncleHuey on Fri May 09, 2014 1:41 pm

I woder if there would have been the same outrage about the original decision if Crowley had broken the jaw of Garry Ablett or Watson or Presti?
avatar
UncleHuey

Join date : 2013-03-20
Posts : 1018
My club : glenelg

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Gingernuts on Fri May 09, 2014 2:11 pm

A question worth posing UH.
avatar
Gingernuts

Join date : 2012-02-01
Posts : 2493
Teams : Adelaide, Sth Adelaide, Langhorne Creek
My club : south

Back to top Go down

Re: Viney's Bump

Post by Chambo Off To Work We Go on Fri May 09, 2014 4:33 pm

What I would like to know.

If the umpires were able to even see if high contact had occurred at the time, what would they pay a free against Viney for?

Is the "bump" in the rule book as a penalty in itself?

So you can get rubbed out for a high bump, but not a non-high bump?
Or is it more a bump that results in head injury of some type?
Or what if the bump results in broken ribs. IE non-high injury.
Or do these buggers not really know what the penalty actually is that they are trying to police?

AFL,
fix it and in relation to a "bump", tell everyone;
- what is a free kick and what is not
- if it matters that it is off the ball or are on ball clashes the same?
- what is reportable and
- what is the associated penalty with or without injury to a player

avatar
Chambo Off To Work We Go

Join date : 2012-02-03
Posts : 2788
My club : sturt

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum