-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Should suspended players remain eligible for the Brownlow Medal?
- Thread starter Tigers of Old
- Start date
I'd hate to see a player not win the Brownlow because of a knock to a player that gets up an plays on or something similar.
RemoteTiger said:
With soccer mums like KB having their say, the likelihood of them returning to the hard bump is low Remote.
However Cooney's 1 game suspension for his hit on the weekend might see a few more creep in.. :don't know
The reason I started this thread is that in recent times I've seen so many 'fair' players get rubbed out for the most innocuous of offences.
Way too often a players chances of winning the competitions top award depends on what we now refer to as MRP lotto. Suspensions handed down are so subjective.
This is why I now think it's wrong to label players as 'unfair' for an entire season of work when in other games they play fairly.
They're better off just totaling the votes in the games where no 'unfair' acts took place.
Missing games through any suspension should be punishment enough. The worse the offence the more games that they can't receive votes.
I've shifted to the "Best" camp now. If a player is suspended then the he'll lose the chance to poll. The whole suspension for sweet fa makes it unfair.
i.e. Say Plasma was Brownlow quality and was having a brilliant season only to get rubbed out for that block on Kruezer or whoever that was. That incident in no way, shape or form would warrant a player being ineligible for the Brownlow but as the rules stand he couldn't win it.
It's just not right
i.e. Say Plasma was Brownlow quality and was having a brilliant season only to get rubbed out for that block on Kruezer or whoever that was. That incident in no way, shape or form would warrant a player being ineligible for the Brownlow but as the rules stand he couldn't win it.
It's just not right
RemoteTiger said:
what part of Cooney running past the ball to bump a bloke with their head down is tough or hard? same as Franklin on Edwards. That is not tough. it is the opposite.
tough would have been Cooney putting his own head over the ball.
It's an umpires award, not an AFLPA award, Coaches award, Tim Tam award, Four 'n' Twenty award etc
If you are suspended, you're a naughty boy in the eyes of the rules of the game, of which the umpires are an adjudicator.
No
If you are suspended, you're a naughty boy in the eyes of the rules of the game, of which the umpires are an adjudicator.
No
New York Tiger said:
what about when a player is suspended for an act the umpires see, but dont deem to be naughty, but the MRP then suspends a player for?
you could argue the Brownlow is the umpires award, but reports are now generally done by the MRP. why should the MRP be relevant to the umpires award?
From wiki...
A player also remains eligible for the Brownlow Medal under the following circumstances:
if he is suspended during the finals or pre-season;
if he serves a suspension in the current season which was earned for an offence committed late in the previous season;
he receives any sort of club-imposed suspension which is not recognised by the AFL Tribunal;
if he is found guilty by the AFL Tribunal of an offence which attracts only a financial penalty.
So... those with a strong and definite opinion that it should stay the same (and BTW, the rules HAVE changed over time), note that the following hypothetical is possible:
Geelong plays Richmond in a semi final. Joel Selwood elbows Trent Cotchin in the head in the first quarter. Cotchin is off concussed for the rest of the game. We lose by 10 points. Selwood gets 25 possessions. But Selwood also gets 3 weeks. A week later Selwood wins the Brownlow medal.
Further to this, Selwood could go on to get suspended from a pre-season game incident the following year, get suspended in another final the same year and win 2 Brownlows in a row, despite being cited and suspended in a final one year, a preseason and a final the next year.
I still think 'within a home and away season' is a meaningless and arbitrary line to draw on what is deemed 'fairest'. Games out is a punishment and the worse the crime, the longer the time (out)
A player also remains eligible for the Brownlow Medal under the following circumstances:
if he is suspended during the finals or pre-season;
if he serves a suspension in the current season which was earned for an offence committed late in the previous season;
he receives any sort of club-imposed suspension which is not recognised by the AFL Tribunal;
if he is found guilty by the AFL Tribunal of an offence which attracts only a financial penalty.
So... those with a strong and definite opinion that it should stay the same (and BTW, the rules HAVE changed over time), note that the following hypothetical is possible:
Geelong plays Richmond in a semi final. Joel Selwood elbows Trent Cotchin in the head in the first quarter. Cotchin is off concussed for the rest of the game. We lose by 10 points. Selwood gets 25 possessions. But Selwood also gets 3 weeks. A week later Selwood wins the Brownlow medal.
Further to this, Selwood could go on to get suspended from a pre-season game incident the following year, get suspended in another final the same year and win 2 Brownlows in a row, despite being cited and suspended in a final one year, a preseason and a final the next year.
I still think 'within a home and away season' is a meaningless and arbitrary line to draw on what is deemed 'fairest'. Games out is a punishment and the worse the crime, the longer the time (out)
antman said:
Yes and it's in the home and away season that you spend your time out.
Thought less about it....Came to the same conclusion.
What's worse than overthinking? Underthinking. The 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' line is sometimes bandied about even if something is broke, but it's too hard to think about, or not popular to... people just don't like change.
Anywho....I'm out voted, so whatevs. Ever since Woewodin won it, it's lost a bit for me anyway.
It's a good point regarding finals mac. I think it will eventually change to just best player, it just requies the situation to play out where a player will win it but become ineligible due to a 50-50 1 week suspension. In the old days a suspension required some pretty unfair actions. Today it's a chook raffle.
Brodders17 said:
He jolted the ball out of the players hands - that's hardly running past the ball.
Baloo said:
Yeah and when Vickery knocked Cox out Vickery still should have been eligible for the Brownlow.
Reckon there was virtually no difference between Vickery n Balmey's efforts except forty years n public perception, both assassinations were superbly executed.RemoteTiger said:
