McVeigh

andrewb · Post by **andrewb** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 11:55 pm

I think this deserves its own thread and, if accurate, should be raised at club level:

Boyler_Room wrote:If McVeigh had have been charged correctly in the first place, an early plea would have seen a simple reprimand since he would have had the 25% downgrading for taking the early plea. So we're penalised for their incompetence there.

That is an absolute disgrace.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:14 am

spikefan · Post by **spikefan** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:27 am

This is actually inaccurate, McVeigh got the 25% downgrading also on the reduced charge because of his guilty plea.

What is a disgrace is that McVeigh was charged for some incident that was really no big deal and should have earned him (and Gary Ablett) a reprimand at worse. I dont know if McBurney is just an Essendon hater, corrupt or plain incompetent, but he should not be an AFL umpire.

As for Gary Ablett he is a real disgrace, I can find no words to describe his despicable and cowardly attitude, good acting though. Up for an oscar.

This @@@@#$ Ablett said during the weekend that McVeigh did hit him and would get suspended. Now after McVeigh pleads guilty he changes his story.. bad form.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/ ... 88,00.html

Good on McVeigh to apologize for having let the club down. As a leader of the club he has to assume responsibility for this things - - we don't want the young players to think it is cool to get suspended for striking like Lloydy, Fletch and McVeigh.

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:31 am

spikefan wrote:I dont know if McBurney is just an Essendon hater, corrupt or plain incompetent, but he should not be an AFL umpire.

The c*** is just a F****** poof. Says he was 30 meteres away from the incident. Considering he was outside the 50m arc and the incident occured in the forward pocket, I would say he was a good 45m away. Not sure how the tribunal can justify going on the evidence of a maggot who saw an incident 45m away, when the same maggot cant even see obvious free kicks 5 meters in front of him.

I have said many a time, I would prefer Big Nose McLaren to umpire our games than that f***wit McAberny. F****** poo-jabber!

Madden · Post by **Madden** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:02 am

Ah, no guys. No corruption here.

McVeigh was charged with striking to the head (a perfectly reasonable charge given the nature of the incident / footage), and we CHOSE to plead that it was a strike to the chest instead.

What we should have done is argued that it was merely a push and not a strike. Ablett testified that he exaggerated the contact and felt 'slight contact to the chest'. We could have easily argued that it was a push, and if the tribunal agreed, then he walks. It was OUR incompetence, not the AFL's, that has resulted in McVeigh getting a week.

I hate the AFL as much as anyone but I am getting very sick of people crying "corruption" every time a decision goes against us.

Rossoneri wrote: The c*** is just a F****** poof.

I have said many a time, I would prefer Big Nose McLaren to umpire our games than that f****** McAberny. F****** poo-jabber!

Very mature. Exhibit A as to why Gringo's post on language was accurate.

Leigh · Post by **Leigh** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:17 am

Leave the enforcing to Bolton to do we dont mind him being reported/ suspended, has gotten away with a fair bit this year in that regard.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:54 am

spikefan wrote:This is actually inaccurate, McVeigh got the 25% downgrading also on the reduced charge because of his guilty plea.

What is a disgrace is that McVeigh was charged for some incident that was really no big deal and should have earned him (and Gary Ablett) a reprimand at worse. I dont know if McBurney is just an Essendon hater, corrupt or plain incompetent, but he should not be an AFL umpire.

As for Gary Ablett he is a real disgrace, I can find no words to describe his despicable and cowardly attitude, good acting though. Up for an oscar.

This @@@@#$ Ablett said during the weekend that McVeigh did hit him and would get suspended. Now after McVeigh pleads guilty he changes his story.. bad form.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/ ... 88,00.html

Good on McVeigh to apologize for having let the club down. As a leader of the club he has to assume responsibility for this things - - we don't want the young players to think it is cool to get suspended for striking like Lloydy, Fletch and McVeigh.

Looks like you found several words

Ablett did nothing that 95% of other players wouldn't do...he milked the situation for a free kick and got it.

McVeigh f***** up by escalating the push and shove. Temporary brain fade is what he was really guilty of and a week on the sidelines is his reward.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:28 am

Staggy wrote:Ah, no guys. No corruption here.

McVeigh was charged with striking to the head (a perfectly reasonable charge given the nature of the incident / footage), and we CHOSE to plead that it was a strike to the chest instead.

What we should have done is argued that it was merely a push and not a strike. Ablett testified that he exaggerated the contact and felt 'slight contact to the chest'. We could have easily argued that it was a push, and if the tribunal agreed, then he walks. It was OUR incompetence, not the AFL's, that has resulted in McVeigh getting a week.

I hate the AFL as much as anyone but I am getting very sick of people crying "corruption" every time a decision goes against us.

Rossoneri wrote: The c*** is just a F****** poof.

I have said many a time, I would prefer Big Nose McLaren to umpire our games than that f****** McAberny. F****** poo-jabber!
Very mature. Exhibit A as to why Gringo's post on language was accurate.

The initial umpires report was incorrect. It was not a strike to the head (as we know), therefore, the charge should have been thrown out on a technicality.......as they've done with other such technically incorrect reports....

So who's incompetent?

Madden · Post by **Madden** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:11 pm

BenDoolan wrote:
Staggy wrote:Ah, no guys. No corruption here.

McVeigh was charged with striking to the head (a perfectly reasonable charge given the nature of the incident / footage), and we CHOSE to plead that it was a strike to the chest instead.

What we should have done is argued that it was merely a push and not a strike. Ablett testified that he exaggerated the contact and felt 'slight contact to the chest'. We could have easily argued that it was a push, and if the tribunal agreed, then he walks. It was OUR incompetence, not the AFL's, that has resulted in McVeigh getting a week.

I hate the AFL as much as anyone but I am getting very sick of people crying "corruption" every time a decision goes against us.

Rossoneri wrote: The c*** is just a F****** poof.

I have said many a time, I would prefer Big Nose McLaren to umpire our games than that f****** McAberny. F****** poo-jabber!
Very mature. Exhibit A as to why Gringo's post on language was accurate.
The initial umpires report was incorrect. It was not a strike to the head (as we know), therefore, the charge should have been thrown out on a technicality.......as they've done with other such technically incorrect reports....

So who's incompetent?

We don't 'know' anything. The footage suggested that it could have been either, therefore being charged with a strike to the head was perfectly legitimate. Charges are upgraded / downgraded at the Tribunal every week - its not uncommon.

They can charge him with whatever the hell they want. They could have charged him with a trip, or a headbutt, or whatever. Doesn't make them incompetent, it might make them silly, but there's a difference.

Who was incompetent? EFC. Instead of saying "he didnt punch him in the head" they should have said "he didnt punch him at all, it was only a push". And if they do that, with the inconclusive footage and Ablett's testimony, he walks. No question.

Heard Bondy (the worlds foremost tribunal / MRP expert) on AW last night and he took that view as well - was stunned that Essendon didn't dispute (rather than water down) the charge.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:25 pm

Staggy wrote:
We don't 'know' anything. The footage suggested that it could have been either, therefore being charged with a strike to the head was perfectly legitimate. Charges are upgraded / downgraded at the Tribunal every week - its not uncommon.

They can charge him with whatever the hell they want. They could have charged him with a trip, or a headbutt, or whatever. Doesn't make them incompetent, it might make them silly, but there's a difference.

Who was incompetent? EFC. Instead of saying "he didnt punch him in the head" they should have said "he didnt punch him at all, it was only a push". And if they do that, with the inconclusive footage and Ablett's testimony, he walks. No question.

Heard Bondy (the worlds foremost tribunal / MRP expert) on AW last night and he took that view as well - was stunned that Essendon didn't dispute (rather than water down) the charge.

Fair enough.

So who's responsible for representing our players at the tribunal?

Makaveli · Post by **Makaveli** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:27 pm

As i stated in another post mcveigh is lucky he didnt get sited for punching ablett with a right hook right off the ball, similar to the holland on williams incident a year or 2 ago. If sited 4 to 5 weeks easy. I wouldnt of been suprised if ablett dobbed him in after that anyway.

spikefan · Post by **spikefan** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:36 pm

Staggy
I don't see it like you at all. The most likely outcome in case the EFC disputes the charge is that McVeigh would get two weeks, which would be devastating; we need to beat Collingwood.

There was NO usable footage, therefore the McBurney testimony is the most relevant and McBurney continue to insist it was a strike. The club had no way to know which way Ablett testimony would go. Ablett spoke to the press of a "Strike" and "Suspension" and this is only after the guilty plea that he mentioned a "Push" which doe not make him look good IMHO.

My two cents is that both McVeigh and Ablett engaged into some amount of sparring and that McBurney should have let it go. He was probably swayed by Ablett excellent acting since he was so far away.

andrewb · Post by **andrewb** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:55 pm

If ablett walked off clutching his jaw I could see how spike would be cited for high contact. But given that he was playing it up, and that he was clutching his chest, the citation is a joke.

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:58 pm

It is blatantly obvious Ablett was not hit in the head. It wasa strike around the throat area and considering Ablett grabber his chest in pain it also suggest that. The entire umpiring crew, from the rules commitee to the umpries is f*****. From head to toe, top to bottom.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:30 pm

You've got a nerve, Staggy and Swoodley.

Permeating and poisoning this thread with your reasoned logic, stately objectivity and cogent rationale. Both of you ought to hang your heads and hope i never come across either of you in public.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:39 pm

jimmyc1985 wrote:You've got a nerve, Staggy and Swoodley.

Permeating and poisoning this thread with your reasoned logic, stately objectivity and cogent rationale. Both of you ought to hang your heads and hope i never come across either of you in public.

Guilty your honour....I throw myself on the mercy of the court (but not the MRP

)

Post by **Megan** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:37 pm

Oi Rosso go easy. I find people using gay related insults offensive