MRP Round 8

[bornadog]

Liam Jones, Western Bulldogs, has been charged with a Level Three engaging in rough conduct Offence (325 demerit points, three-match sanction) for engaging in rough conduct against Melbourne’s Dean Terlich during the third quarter of the Round Eight match between the Western Bulldogs and Melbourne, played at the MCG on Saturday May 10, 2014.

In summary, he can accept a two-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Melbourne Football Club, the incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), high impact (three points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Three Offence, drawing 325 demerit points and a three-match sanction. He has no existing good or bad record. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 243.75 demerit points and a two-match sanction.

[azabob]

Two matches in the current environment is failrly lucky I would think.

[whythelongface]

Two matches in the current environment is failrly lucky I would think.

Agreed - we would be silly not to accept it.

[always right]

Two matches in the current environment is failrly lucky I would think.

Why lucky? They still have to assess it against the criteria and the penalty is formula-based.

[bornadog]

Liam hardest hit with all others only a one match suspension.

In my opinion, Liam tried to avoid the player but still clipped him with his shoulder. When you look at some of the others, they went straight for the man and only get one match.

[always right]

His problem was it was deemed as high impact and he didn't qualitfy as having played long enough to be classified as having a good record.

[bulldogtragic]

Take 2 and run.

Just not into another player. Or it will be another 2 matches suspension.

[Greystache]

Two matches in the current environment is failrly lucky I would think.

Yep agree. It could just have easily been classified at reckless.

[Ozza]

I don't have too much of an issue with him being suspended given that it was contact to the head. But he wasn't helped by Terlich turning at the same moment - probably made it worse.

I would assume we will have him take the 2 matches.

[Ozza]

Liam hardest hit with all others only a one match suspension.

In my opinion, Liam tried to avoid the player but still clipped him with his shoulder. When you look at some of the others, they went straight for the man and only get one match.

I agree. In comparison to others, Jones' was more incidental, than say Lecras' for instance - who came in late to a player disposing of the ball - rather than the contact occurring in a contest.

[chef]

Yep, take 2 and run.

Wasn't pretty and deserves a couple of weeks.

[FrediKanoute]

He has no existing good or bad record

How can someone have no good or bad record. I would have thoughts its fairly binary. If his record is not bad, then it must be good or clean?

[comrade]

It shit me that they kept making a big deal on the telecast of Terlich being knocked out cold. He clearly wasn't unconscious at any stage, none of that stiff arm paralysis that you see when they're truly hit hard, and he was up and about on the bench later in the game.

Pretty harsh for what was a split second reaction, with no malice intended.

[bornadog]

How can someone have no good or bad record. I would have thoughts its fairly binary. If his record is not bad, then it must be good or clean?

Dickheads

[Remi Moses]

No issue with the decision.
Joke how Chappy throws the elbows and gets a week!

[Ozza]

It shit me that they kept making a big deal on the telecast of Terlich being knocked out cold. He clearly wasn't unconscious at any stage, none of that stiff arm paralysis that you see when they're truly hit hard, and he was up and about on the bench later in the game.

Pretty harsh for what was a split second reaction, with no malice intended.

I was sitting amongst a throng of Melbourne supporters in the members who were incensed at that thug Jones! (aka "number 19"). They were the same people roaring with approval whenever Viney got the ball.

[Greystache]

How can someone have no good or bad record. I would have thoughts its fairly binary. If his record is not bad, then it must be good or clean?

If you haven't played much football then you can't have a good record. You don't get a discount for simply not having a bad record. It's like saying you're either fat or anorexic, choose one.

[G-Mo77]

2 weeks seems OK to me and what I expected.

Chapman two charges and gets one week. He didn't hit him hard enough on the 2nd charge. LOL.

[Dry Rot]

How come Roughead got less?

[LostDoggy]

How come Roughead got less?

Drawcard

[Twodogs]

If you haven't played much football then you can't have a good record. You don't get a discount for simply not having a bad record. It's like saying you're either fat or anorexic, choose one.


Wouldn't the choice would be between obese or anorexic in that they are both medical/psychological conditions. Fat is just a by-product of being lazy and is the opposite of skinny.

Anyway the whole 'discount for a good record' thing doesn't stand up to jurisprudence I reckon.

[Twodogs]

How come Roughead got less?

Early plea/prior good record I guess.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

2 weeks is probably fair - still frustrating at the lack of consistency though. Viney should have got 2 based on the rule.

Also BS that Roughead got 1 - thought his was far more obvious than the rest. He went past the ball to bump, and got McGlynn squarely in the head. I guess he's simply lucky that Ben got straight back up.

[Go_Dogs]

2 weeks is probably fair - still frustrating at the lack of consistency though. Viney should have got 2 based on the rule.

Also BS that Roughead got 1 - thought his was far more obvious than the rest. He went past the ball to bump, and got McGlynn squarely in the head. I guess he's simply lucky that Ben got straight back up.

Agree on the Roughead one, that should be the exact bit that gets big weeks. I heard Eddie on Fox last night justifying the Roughead hit and they then went on to slam Jones. It was obvious what was going to happen.

It really is a farce. I can cop Jones getting the weeks, but how about some consistency.

What are you trying to police? Heavy hits of players putting their heads over the ball was top of the list wasn't it?

[SonofScray]

It is just a farce. Of course Jones was going to get a more severe penalty. In the eyes of the AFL and the media he is a nobody. Playing for a nothing Club. Perfect opportunity for the MRP to exercise some clout without fear of anyone kicking up a stink.

Fair enough in the current climate for a suspension. But explain to me why his bump's impact was graded higher than the others?
Explain to me why an elbow, which has no place in the game and is used intentionally, receives a less serious grading than an actual skill of the game that has inadvertently caused some damage.

[LostDoggy]

It is just a farce. Of course Jones was going to get a more severe penalty. In the eyes of the AFL and the media he is a nobody. Playing for a nothing Club. Perfect opportunity for the MRP to exercise some clout without fear of anyone kicking up a stink.

Fair enough in the current climate for a suspension. But explain to me why his bump's impact was graded higher than the others?
Explain to me why an elbow, which has no place in the game and is used intentionally, receives a less serious grading than an actual skill of the game that has inadvertently caused some damage.

Silly boy. You're assuming the presence of reason/logic.

[josie]

Jones unfortunate to clip Dee player's ?chin?. Clearly no malice. I was at game and very worried as Dee's player did not move for a while.

I'm a woman, never played the game so I'll ask a stupid question - if you are where Jones was compared to where Dee's player was - why didn't Jones tackle this player instead?

[soupman]

I'm a woman, never played the game so I'll ask a stupid question - if you are where Jones was compared to where Dee's player was - why didn't Jones tackle this player instead?

IIRC Terlich didn't have the ball until very late, by which point Jones wouldn't have been able to either hold on or change his momentum to effect the tackle.

[Maddog37]

I think Jones drops his arm in to his chest which lowers his shoulder as a way to protect himself as well as make solid contact with the opposition. Once he is completely filled out he will be able to hit blokes with his chest and have the same effect. He could also use the Buddy method of pretending to tackle but whacking the opponent in the face with his forearm. Not sure all the commentators will crap on about how much of an accident it was like they do with Buddy though.

[F'scary]

Well at least Jones showed us he has improved his skills in this area as well. The upside of the incident going forward is that more opposition players will keep out of his way when he runs through. He sure is a big mother.

[Max469]

got McGlynn squarely in the head. I guess he's simply lucky that Ben got straight back up.

He was struggling to get back up. I know for fact that the only reason Benny got back up was because he knew if he didn't, it would be bad for Roughy and he didn't want him to get weeks as they are mates. He face was all bruised down the side of his face. Pretty sore - as you would expect him to be.

[josie]

thanks soupaman for good explanation

The way I see it: If you bump when you too are cleary going for the ball any ill-effects on oppositon players are viewed in more +ve light than just bumping them off the ball.