MRO Thread

[bornadog]

Report should have been withdrawn

.@baileydale31
cleared to play North Melbourne next week, after the MRO overturned a match-day report.

[jeemak]

You could tell by the way the Swans players remonstrated that they didn't think there was a lot in it.

[bornadog]

Zach Merrett has been suspended one game by the MRO for his hit on Jack Silvagni.

Fair enough, punching in the ribs must stop, it is a stupid cheating practise.

[Remi Moses]

Cheap shot and deserved 1

[GVGjr]

Zach Merrett has been suspended one game by the MRO for his hit on Jack Silvagni.

Fair enough, punching in the ribs must stop, it is a stupid cheating practise.

Why did it deserve one week? Intentional and high impact.

Silvagni didn't finish the game and suffered a bruised lung and fractured rib. He spent the night in the hospital and is unlikely to play next week. Merrett is very lucky to get just one week

[Twodogs]

Why did it deserve one week? Intentional and high impact.

Silvagni didn't finish the game and suffered a bruised lung and fractured rib. He spent the night in the hospital and is unlikely to play next week. Merrett is very lucky to get just one week

I thought so too. Kidney punches are right up there with coward's punches from my POV. You have very little control over the damage you can cause to the person you hit.

[EasternWest]

Why did it deserve one week? Intentional and high impact.

Silvagni didn't finish the game and suffered a bruised lung and fractured rib. He spent the night in the hospital and is unlikely to play next week. Merrett is very lucky to get just one week

Maybe I'm alone but I think the impact on another player should have zero bearing on the outcome.

If Silvagni is uninjured and plays on we barely talk about Merrett whacking him.

The act should be judged in isolation, and in isolation it's a one weeker.

[GVGjr]

Maybe I'm alone but I think the impact on another player should have zero bearing on the outcome.

If Silvagni is uninjured and plays on we barely talk about Merrett whacking him.

The act should be judged in isolation, and in isolation it's a one weeker.

But is it not intentional and high impact? If so why should that be a single week?
I added the outcome to highlight the level of impact

[bornadog]

But is it not intentional and high impact? If so why should that be a single week?
I added the outcome to highlight the level of impact

Why should a clenched fist punch be allowed in our game? What is the difference between a clenched fist to the upper body versus the guts. It still bloody hurts.

Stamp it out I say, unnecessary and doesn't add to the game.

[GVGjr]

Why should a clenched fist punch be allowed in our game? What is the difference between a clenched fist to the upper body versus the guts. It still bloody hurts.

Stamp it out I say, unnecessary and doesn't add to the game.

It's why I'm challenging the notion that a one week suspension is a fair outcome?
He didn't focus on getting the ball and it was more about making a physical contact with the player and he did so with a closed fist and with a high level of impact

[bornadog]

It's why I'm challenging the notion that a one week suspension is a fair outcome?
He didn't focus on getting the ball and it was more about making a physical contact with the player and he did so with a closed fist and with a high level of impact

Do you think it should be longer?

[GVGjr]

Do you think it should be longer?

I'd like to know if it was regarded as both intentional and high impact? If so then 2 weeks should have or could have been considered
At no stage was getting the ball his priority and he hit Silvagni with a closed fist.

I wouldn't think Essendon will appeal the one week suspension

[The Adelaide Connection]

I'd like to know if it was regarded as both intentional and high impact? If so then 2 weeks should have or could have been considered
At no stage was getting the ball his priority and he hit Silvagni with a closed fist.

I wouldn't think Essendon will appeal the one week suspension

It was regarded as "Careless". It was most certainly intentional, so how can they justify not classifying it as that?


https://www.afl.com.au/news/458941/m...-one-game-bans
"Zach Merrett, Essendon, has been charged with Striking Jack Silvagni, Carlton, during the first quarter of the Round Four match between Essendon and Carlton, played at the MCG on Saturday June 27.

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

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Careless Conduct with High Impact and Body Contact. The incident was classified as a one-match sanction"

[GVGjr]

It was regarded as "Careless". It was most certainly intentional, so how can they justify not classifying it as that?


https://www.afl.com.au/news/458941/m...-one-game-bans
"Zach Merrett, Essendon, has been charged with Striking Jack Silvagni, Carlton, during the first quarter of the Round Four match between Essendon and Carlton, played at the MCG on Saturday June 27.

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

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Careless Conduct with High Impact and Body Contact. The incident was classified as a one-match sanction"

It's seems a reasonable assessment but it's then careless with a closed fist where getting the ball was never the intention and the impact is either high or medium but with a high consequence.
I think he's done well with that adjudication but can understand why others might feel it's harsh

[jeemak]

It was regarded as "Careless". It was most certainly intentional, so how can they justify not classifying it as that?


https://www.afl.com.au/news/458941/m...-one-game-bans
"Zach Merrett, Essendon, has been charged with Striking Jack Silvagni, Carlton, during the first quarter of the Round Four match between Essendon and Carlton, played at the MCG on Saturday June 27.

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

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Careless Conduct with High Impact and Body Contact. The incident was classified as a one-match sanction"

We had a good discussion at a family do yesterday about the apologetic nature of the AFL towards basically everything that's not entirely flash within the game. Violence, racism, sexism, the fact that not a single player in the AFL is gay (apparently), you name it.

Reality is the competition is a mirror of society's worst traits. That what Merrett did could be classified as careless is completely wild.

Our president, and every person at our club is behind the times and is tainted just like everyone in the AFL and its associates are. For example, would Peter Gordon say in court that it was careless if someone had a rib and organ injury as a result of such a crude act if it happened in public (which it did, you know, happen in public anyway)?

No, he wouldn't. But if it was one of his players or a player from another club, he definitely would say it in public because different rules apply. That's hypocrisy writ large.

It's we supporters who need to stand up and say this isn't acceptable. You can't smash somebody's face or kidneys in for no reason on a footy field because it doesn't reflect our values of decency. Everyone in the industry needs to stop being violence apologists.