Herald Sun reporter Jon Anderson talks to Fox Sports about the suspension of Melbourne Demons' Jack Viney, which he views as a landmark decision.
The Jack Viney case is the latest example of the AFL Tribunal not doing what it's meant to do. Source: News Corp Australia
THE AFL tribunal system, introduced 10 seasons ago to reduce the amount of guesswork and subjectivity, should be replaced immediately.
It is a system that sadly leaves no room for common sense, something that would have seen Jack Viney walk free on Tuesday night.
ROBBO: THE GAME IS THE FOOL
RIGHT CALL: WINGARD BACKS BUMP DECISION
#VINEY: TWITTER MELTDOWN AFTER DECISION
'TRAGIC': VOSS CALLS ON DEES TO APPEAL
TRIBUNAL: VINEY GUILTY, HANDED TWO-MATCH BAN
Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley says he was surprised to see Melbourne's Jack Viney suspended for his bump on Tom Lynch, insisting it was a mere accident.
And while the Viney case will hopefully become a catalyst for change, reality shows the system has broken down all too often in recent years.
Rather than eliminating guesswork it seems to increase it as we debate whether an action is intentional or reckless, as was the case when Brett Deledio had an elbow to the head of Matthew Stokes downgraded from intentional to reckless.
So "hey mate, cop this" but please don't get too upset because my intent wasn't to raise my elbow and make contact with your head, more just a regrettable reckless moment in my life. Please.
The current system was introduced by the then AFL Football Operations manager Adrian Anderson in 2005.
AFL correspondent Julian de Stoop brings us the latest reactions to Jack Viney's surprise suspension, with both past and present players venting their confusion about the ruling.
Used in the NRL, a table of offences with set penalties are offered to a player, allowing them to accept sanction without having to go before the tribunal.
Early on there was a degree of patience and some acceptance but it has sadly become yet another kangaroo court.
In Viney's case, he didn't even get to hear from the Match Review Panel and was sent straight to the tribunal for reasons that escaped most sane persons.
The tribunal members in Wayne Schimmelbusch, Wayne Henwood and Emmett Dunne decided that Viney had bumped Tom Lynch and once they went down that path the Melbourne on-baller was stuffed.
Melbourne's Jack Viney has been handed a two-match ban by the tribunal after being found guilty of a bump on Tom Lynch, while Richmond's Brett Deledio walked away from a striking charge with just a reprimand.
They had the option to deem it an unavoidable collision but chose not to and from there he was penalised accordingly. And wrongly, and unfairly, and against the spirit of the game.
So what would be different for Schimmelbusch, Henwood and Dunne if we went back to the old system? Well, one, they would have some wiggle room which isn't available at present, and two, they could judge the act by using their common sense.
For those who have forgotten, common sense is a collection of the following: native intelligence, sound judgment, level-headedness, prudence, discernment, acumen, sharp-wittedness, canniness, astuteness, shrewdness, judiciousness, wisdom, insight, intuitiveness, perceptiveness, perspicacity, vision, understanding, intelligence, reason, powers of reasoning.
What do you think of the AFL Tribunal's decision to ban Jack Viney?
No common sense in kangaroo court
This article
No common sense in kangaroo court
can be opened in url
http://aflnewstop.blogspot.com/2014/05/no-common-sense-in-kangaroo-court.html
No common sense in kangaroo court
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar