Official - Crows v Cats abandoned, points split, rest to go ahead, all brownlow votes will count

[Bone71]

I'd be a little peeved if Hawthorn missed the finals because of this.

What if you missed the GF because of this?

Do you really think this compromises the competition any more the the fixture already does? Teams can miss the finals, top 4 or GF simply because they have 1 harder away game over a season than another team. If the H&A season was completely equal for all teams you may have a point.

Personally I wouldn't have cared if the AFL had awarded the 4 points to Geelong but I really respect that the Cats offered to split them and that the AFL agreed. I also think you may also be not factoring in that if the game went ahead the result more than likely would have been just as compromising anyway.

 

[Hawkers]

Do you really think this compromises the competition any more the the fixture already does? Teams can miss the finals, top 4 or GF simply because they have 1 harder away game over a season than another team. If the H&A season was completely equal for all teams you may have a point.

Personally I wouldn't have cared if the AFL had awarded the 4 points to Geelong but I really respect that the Cats offered to split them and that the AFL agreed. I also think you may also be not factoring in that if the game went ahead the result more than likely would have been just as compromising anyway.

Just because the integrity is compromised other ways is no reason to compromise it further. To do so is a race to the bottom

 

[Bone71]

Just because the integrity is compromised other ways is no reason to compromise it further. To do so is a race to the bottom

For an unprecedented situation? The only compromise to the comp is that two teams percentage is now irrelevant just as it would have been if the game had been a draw in the normal course of events.

 

[Forward Press]

Just because the integrity is compromised other ways is no reason to compromise it further. To do so is a race to the bottom

If a competition cannot be compromised a little because a club's head coach was murdered two days before, then I don't really want to follow that competition.

 

[footycats007]

I feel as though the cancelled match decision was respectful and the right thing to do.

However, I do not agree with the brownlow decision. It just makes the process unfair.

 

[Hardhat11]

In my opinion, your opinion is nonsense. You can't award a win to both sides. It lacks sense. Devoid of sense. Nonsense.

I'm quite calm, thanks for your concern though

Whatever mate ...lateral thinking not your strength ...that's ok

Plenty of other sports award both teams with a gold medal for instance if it's a draw

Again some lateral thinking examples ....agree to disagree is concept I enjoy and im not going to agree with your opinion just to make you feel good or whatever.

 

[The_Wookie]

They are the competition rules.

We all understand it's tragic circumstances. We all can show sympathy and some can show empathy. But the integrity of the competition is damaged if the game isn't played. Forfeit and the integrity is damaged as Geelong and Adelaide players play less games thus effecting the rest of the competition. Split the points and that is compounded.
The least damage done to the competition is for them to have made up the game later in the season

Exactly how is the integrity affected if the result is a draw and points are split?

Its a result both clubs, the league, and the football public in general, seem to have approved of. Its impact on the ladder is exactly the same as if the game had been played as a draw, no more, no less. The record will show they had the same number of games as everyone else, with several wins, losses and a draw.

 

[Kram]

I can't believe that some people actually don't want Brownlow votes given for this week.

 

[The_Wookie]

worth noting that the SANFL have postponed both Port and Adelaide SANFL matches for this weekend to next month.

 

[moogerfooger]

They are the competition rules.

We all understand it's tragic circumstances. We all can show sympathy and some can show empathy. But the integrity of the competition is damaged if the game isn't played. Forfeit and the integrity is damaged as Geelong and Adelaide players play less games thus effecting the rest of the competition. Split the points and that is compounded.
The least damage done to the competition is for them to have made up the game later in the season

you should print out your posts in this thread and hand them to Al Clarkson. he'd slap you so far into next week you'd forever have difficulty pronouncing the word 'integrity'.

 

[sherb]

Exactly how is the integrity affected if the result is a draw and points are split?

Because the clubs got points for a game that wasn't even played.

 

[sherb]

The Brownlow votes decision is insane. It corrupts the Brownlow (even more), is disrespectful for Cats and Crows players, and is generally the worst possible decision by the AFL.

I would think that the decision was taken after consultation with the two clubs affected.

 

[The_Wookie]

Because the clubs got points for a game that wasn't even played.

That doesnt affect the integrity of the competition. The points would have been awarded whether it was played or forfeited. Its not like anyone gained an advantage from this. The clubs and the league came to an agreement on the best course of action. The other clubs arent even arguing.

 

[sherb]

That doesnt affect the integrity of the competition. The points would have been awarded whether it was played or forfeited. Its not like anyone gained an advantage from this. The clubs and the league came to an agreement on the best course of action. The other clubs arent even arguing.

Of course it does. The fact that an agreement was reached doesn't change that. Nor the fact that it was in the rules.

Two clubs are getting 2 points each for a game they did not play. Two clubs only have to play 21 games to compete for 22 games' worth of points.

And it fundamentally changes things, because (unless you want to argue the match would have been a draw if played) then instead of one side ending up with 4 points and the other zero, you have two sides ending up with two points.

 

[Jables]

1.) No one cares (or should care) about the Brownlow. It's not even a good midfielders medal.

2.) If it's unfair that players get votes for their performances, it's certainly unfair that some clubs could be pipped by 2 premiership points for a game that wasn't played. But no one in their right mind would complain about it. Fairness doesn't come into it, compromises have to be made for the competition after a tragic event.

 

[JeffDunne]

2.) If it's unfair that players get votes for their performances, it's certainly unfair that some clubs could be pipped by 2 premiership points for a game that wasn't played. But no one in their right mind would complain about it. Fairness doesn't come into it, compromises have to be made for the competition after a tragic event.

You would think so wouldn't you?

 

[TGFC]

i think the AFL and all involved got this 100% correct. there has to be compromises from all parties, being two teams get to split the points, however they are now disadvantaged in relation to all individual awards such as Brownlow, Coleman etc.

I can't see the crows pushing for finals this year now and Geelong are going to struggle throughout the year as well so i think it is a moot point anyway

 

[JUBJUB]

BTW due to the cancellation of the Crows v Cats game Fox Footy have allowed Seven to show the Essendon v StKilda game [starts 1.10pm] on delay at 3pm.

 

[Forward Press]

Of course it does. The fact that an agreement was reached doesn't change that. Nor the fact that it was in the rules.

Two clubs are getting 2 points each for a game they did not play. Two clubs only have to play 21 games to compete for 22 games' worth of points.

And it fundamentally changes things, because (unless you want to argue the match would have been a draw if played) then instead of one side ending up with 4 points and the other zero, you have two sides ending up with two points.

What if Geelong travelled, and the game went ahead, but at the bounce the players just stood in an interlocking circle (like in all other games so far) for one minute of silence, then shook each other's hands and sat on the field for four quarters? 0-0 is the final score, 2 points shared, and exactly the same as what is happening now.

God forbid we display compassion for a club enduring extraordinary circumstances. I struggle to understand why some here are still prioritising trivial s**t like Brownlow votes and 'integrity' of a 22 game fixture over a head coach being murdered.

 

[sherb]

What if Geelong travelled, and the game went ahead, but at the bounce the players just stood in an interlocking circle (like in all other games so far) for one minute of silence, then shook each other's hands and sat on the field for four quarters? 0-0 is the final score, 2 points shared, and exactly the same as what is happening now.

God forbid we display compassion for a club enduring extraordinary circumstances. I struggle to understand why some here are still prioritising trivial s**t like Brownlow votes and 'integrity' of a 22 game fixture over a head coach being murdered.

Mate, give me a break with your over the top sarcasm. You are a better poster than that.

If you have a problem though, I'd suggest you similarly castigate your fellow mod who I was quoting.

I was simply contesting the argument that awarding a draw didn't affect the integrity of the competition. Which was an isolated point in a far broader discussion and still worth discussing.

It doesn't suggest for one minute that I or others aren't considering the compassionate side of things.

Pretty poor post by you all round.

Edit - if the bolded is so important to you as a mod, I would suggest you change the title of the thread (Official - Crows v Geelong, points split, rest to go ahead, all brownlow votes to count). Because it certainly seems like an invitation for discussion to me.

 

[Forward Press]

Mate, give me a break with your over the top sarcasm. You are a better poster than that.

If you have a problem though, I'd suggest you similarly castigate your fellow mod who I was quoting.

I was simply contesting the argument that awarding a draw didn't affect the integrity of the competition. Which was an isolated point in a far broader discussion and still worth discussing.

It doesn't suggest for one minute that I or others aren't considering the compassionate side of things.

Pretty poor post by you all round.

It is irritating to me that some are thinking the integrity of the competition is better served by forcing the game to go ahead. Yes, there are broader ramifications for cancelling an entire game for things like the fixture, gameday commitments, Brownlow votes etc. But this is an unprecedented situation and those arguing for the integrity of the competition prioritise trivial things over what just happened.

For reference, we play the Crows at home next weekend. If the club still isn't up for it, I'd be happy to walk away with another shared 2 points even if it dents our chances at top 4. Nothing like this has happened before, and it is highly unlilkely it will happen again in the near future. I couldn't care less about arguments like 'but then they only play 21 games while the rest play 22, that's unfair!'

 

[sherb]

It is irritating to me that some are thinking the integrity of the competition is better served by forcing the game to go ahead. Yes, there are broader ramifications for cancelling an entire game for things like the fixture, gameday commitments, Brownlow votes etc. But this is an unprecedented situation and those arguing for the integrity of the competition prioritise trivial things over what just happened.

For reference, we play the Crows at home next weekend. If the club still isn't up for it, I'd be happy to walk away with another shared 2 points even if it dents our chances at top 4. Nothing like this has happened before, and it is highly unlilkely it will happen again in the near future. I couldn't care less about arguments like 'but then they only play 21 games while the rest play 22, that's unfair!'

Check the edit to my post above.

If you don't want discussion, don't issue an invitation to do so via the thread title.

And, as tempted as I am, I won't go into what I think should be expected of main board mods with the tone of their posts.

 

[Forward Press]

Check the edit to my post above.

If you don't want discussion, don't issue an invitation to do so via the thread title.

And, as tempted as I am, I won't go into what I think should be expected of main board mods with the tone of their posts.

The posts arguing for the integrity of the competition are still up. Your posts are all still up, too. You are allowed to hold contrary opinions even if I vehemently disagree because hey, that's what the main board is for.

I am also allowed to post in my capacity as a normal poster, and I don't have to 'tone it down' either if I genuinely have that viewpoint. What are you suggesting?

 

[sherb]

The posts arguing for the integrity of the competition are still up. Your posts are all still up, too. You are allowed to hold contrary opinions even if I vehemently disagree because hey, that's what the main board is for.

I am also allowed to post in my capacity as a normal poster, and I don't have to 'tone it down' either if I genuinely have that viewpoint. What are you suggesting?

It's not about posts still being up. It's about you putting up a sarcastic response to someone who was simply discussing something which BF itself is encouraging people to post about.

If people are discussing things that grate with you, it's an issue for you to take up with your fellow mods. Not to take out on individual posters with smart alec replies.

And I would have thought that it was incumbent on you as a moderator to contribute to the quality of the posting on the main board. Which I don't think you did in this instance.

Thanks.

 

[Forward Press]

It's not about posts still being up. It's about you putting up a sarcastic post to someone who was simply discussing something which BF itself is encouraging people to post about.

If people are discussing things that grate with you, it's an issue for you to take up with your fellow mods. Not to take out on individual posters with smart alec replies.

And I would have thought that it was incumbent on you as a moderator to contribute to the quality of the posting on the main board. Which I don't think you did in this instance.

Thanks.

If you have an issue with this - "God forbid we display compassion for a club enduring extraordinary circumstances." - then I don't agree with it being an inappropriate post for this topic, or for the main board in general. I can disagree with main board posters and there is nothing suggesting a moderator cannot engage in discussion even with 'smart alec' replies.

Anyway, back on topic, since I'd rather not contribute to derailing the thread further.

PM me if you want.