Prediction Brownlow tonight

Remove this Banner Ad

WakeUpPies said:
Many questionable winners over the years. Clearly the umps didn't expect us to do well (and keep doing well) this year. Naicos is basically guaranteed a Brownlow if we become a consistent top 4 threat!
Click to expand...
It’s almost impossible to win win a Brownlow as a collingwood player. Buckley screwed when Woewodin won it, Swan should have had to only to lose to a Carlton scum bag. What a joke. I feel for Nick, he’ll only win 3-4
 

Log in to remove this ad.

magpies42 said:
It’s almost impossible to win win a Brownlow as a collingwood player. Buckley screwed when Woewodin won it, Swan should have had to only to lose to a Carlton scum bag. What a joke. I feel for Nick, he’ll only win 3-4
Click to expand...

The fact that Buckley had to share his only Brownlow is a bigger joke than Swan losing in 2010. Dragging duds like Glenn Freeborn and Carl Steinford into the finals.
 
magpies42 said:
We finish equal second and poll 12th in voting as a team. How does that happen.
Click to expand...

It happens because we have a reasonably well balanced team that doesn’t rely on the same superstars week after week like Carlton do.

It’s a good thing.
 
magpies42 said:
Pathetic, can’t win goal of the year or mark of the year…it’s a joke of a competition.
Click to expand...

Jaicos has won GOTY before.

Also GOTY and MOTY are commentators awards. Doesn’t matter what the player on the field is doing, if the commentators are busy discussing the number of seagulls on the pitch or some other inane drivel, then the player isn’t going to poll well.
 
Setter Man said:
Got to love it. Collingwood lose by a point Saturday and Cripps wins the Brownlow by one vote.
* I love Crippa and I love my Club!
Click to expand...

He shouldn’t have been playing in round 23 and we knocked you out of the 8 regardless. Enjoy your asterisked midfielder’s medal.
 
Setter Man said:
Got to love it. Collingwood lose by a point Saturday and Cripps wins the Brownlow by one vote.
* I love Crippa and I love my Club!
Click to expand...
While i totally agree Cripps is a gun and deserved to win ( bar the farce that got him off a suspension) , maybe this is something that belongs on your own forum.
 
Jafo said:
Credit where credit is due. Amazing win by Cripps to cap off a stellar season.

Wrighty should reach out and offer him a Rookie position so he can taste finals action before he retires.
Click to expand...
Cripps is destined to be another Robbie Flower or Bobby Skillton, will rack up the individual honours but play little finals, unless he leaves that rabble of a club. Let these flogs delude themselves of the importance of the Brownlow and we will continue to play finals and build a team for sustained finals success
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

if ANYTHING comes out of brownlow night....and cripps getting the medal.... is that at no stage in any AFL process should lawyers be allowed into the proceedings....never ever.....never....

To actually throw out a report because of some minor procedural flaw is a complete nonsense. This is football. THis isnt about a multinational trying to escape paying a fine for pollution. Lawyers do their work there as well. But in football, the report is made. A fair hearing is given. A decision is made on the facts.
 
Markfs said:
if ANYTHING comes out of brownlow night....and cripps getting the medal.... is that at no stage in any AFL process should lawyers be allowed into the proceedings....never ever.....never....

To actually throw out a report because of some minor procedural flaw is a complete nonsense. This is football. This isnt about a multinational trying to escape paying a fine for pollution. Lawyers do their work there as well. But in football, the report is made. A fair hearing is given. A decision is made on the facts.
Click to expand...
Oh Marky, why do you hurt the lawyers so? The MRO/Tribunal/Appeals structure is in place to actually reduce the involvement of lawyers. If the structure wasn't in its current form, players would still be able to head to the courts as a last resort, like Barry Hall. So there needs to be natural justice, right to appeal, etc. All of which becomes necessarily legalistic. This has only recently changed - a few years back an Appeal was a fresh hearing.

Now if the Cripps situation was actually some sort of Criminal hearing, then the result would have likely been a re-hearing. But that is clearly impractical in a tribunal/appeals setting. So he gets off.

I think I recall there used to be plenty of reliance on the umps getting their reports absolutely correct - and if they weren't, say if it was a right arm instead of a left, then the matter was thrown out. Or am I imagining that? Would you want to return to that?
 
sideswipe said:
Oh Marky, why do you hurt the lawyers so? The MRO/Tribunal/Appeals structure is in place to actually reduce the involvement of lawyers. If the structure wasn't in its current form, players would still be able to head to the courts as a last resort, like Barry Hall. So there needs to be natural justice, right to appeal, etc. All of which becomes necessarily legalistic. This has only recently changed - a few years back an Appeal was a fresh hearing.

Now if the Cripps situation was actually some sort of Criminal hearing, then the result would have likely been a re-hearing. But that is clearly impractical in a tribunal/appeals setting. So he gets off.

I think I recall there used to be plenty of reliance on the umps getting their reports absolutely correct - and if they weren't, say if it was a right arm instead of a left, then the matter was thrown out. Or am I imagining that? Would you want to return to that?
Click to expand...

There's an easy way to stop players appealing to the courts....... forbid it. It works for restraint of trade. Have them sign something that says that they agree to abide by the AFL processes and decisions. Then no lawyers would be involved and the AFL world would be a simpler, happier place.
 
Markfs said:
There's an easy way to stop players appealing to the courts....... forbid it. It works for restraint of trade. Have them sign something that says that they agree to abide by the AFL processes and decisions. Then no lawyers would be involved and the AFL world would be a simpler, happier place.
Click to expand...
Not that simple, not sure that would work. You don't think the AFL and their lawyers wouldn't prefer a simpler, "non-legal" system?
 
sideswipe said:
Not that simple, not sure that would work. You don't think the AFL and their lawyers wouldn't prefer a simpler, "non-legal" system?
Click to expand...

I am saying that whatever process they use, dont let lawyers into the system. They do not provide solutions to situations where there are common goals. Some legalistic crap from law and order does nothing to address the issue of concussion and getting a workable outcome to balancing the rights of the player hitting the opponent...and that opponent.
 
Markfs said:
I am saying that whatever process they use, dont let lawyers into the system. They do not provide solutions to situations where there are common goals. Some legalistic crap from law and order does nothing to address the issue of concussion and getting a workable outcome to balancing the rights of the player hitting the opponent...and that opponent.
Click to expand...
Gawd, stop being a baby. The AFL is "big business" and the game itself has laws. Expecting organisations and individuals to protect themselves, enforce rights, etc., without lawyers is like saying let's do medicine without doctors.

Blanket generalisations like, "They do not provide solutions to situations where there are common goals" is just a complete load of garbage. You must have had a bad experience or not much experience with lawyers.

The question of concussion in sport is vexed, but to suggest something like, "it would work better without lawyers because the administrators would make better decisions" is just wrongheaded. What happens when you don't like the administrator's decision? How do I protect myself from being prevented from earning a living?
 
sideswipe said:
Gawd, stop being a baby. The AFL is "big business" and the game itself has laws. Expecting organisations and individuals to protect themselves, enforce rights, etc., without lawyers is like saying let's do medicine without doctors.

Blanket generalisations like, "They do not provide solutions to situations where there are common goals" is just a complete load of garbage. You must have had a bad experience or not much experience with lawyers.

The question of concussion in sport is vexed, but to suggest something like, "it would work better without lawyers because the administrators would make better decisions" is just wrongheaded. What happens when you don't like the administrator's decision? How do I protect myself from being prevented from earning a living?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jmac70
Prediction 2023 Brownlow Medal
22 23 24 25 26
Replies
636
Views
15K
atmywittsend
atmywittsend
domus
Tonight I was suddenly enveloped in the magical possibilities ahead.
Replies
16
Views
854
Cyclops
C

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top