The Bowden omission is bordering on farcical.
The Club may be embarrassed at the end of the year when he is in the top 5 of the B and F count after 12 rounds - then all of a sudden his voting comes to a halt. This is a 200 game player, dual All Australian player we are talking about.
He is absolutley a scapegoat for the ineptness of club recruiting and poor output from a high percentage of other players. A highly flexible and valuable player, thrown all over the place to plug holes in many ordinary teams. Very, very smart.
Surely long and well performed servants of the club - particularly as he has been through a terrible era with little support - should be treated with more respect. Why would a club expect loyalty from it's players, when this happens in return?
I do not buy the argument that it needs to be done for the good of the Club - rubbish. You have to look after your players to a degree as well. This argument only fuels my argument - that he is a scapegoat for other's poor output in recruiting, playing and coaching..
He should be played (if form holds, and it is fine at the moment) until the end of the year, and given the send off he deserves.
None of the other 4 omissions are an issue for me, and I have been a big Coughlan fan.
It stinks of Knighta all over again (who would want to have a long career at Richmond, fair dinkum. And no I am not saying Bowden is the same class as Knighta - but the theory is the same)