Jackson & Richo question.

[bigrayohall20]

Just a couple of quick questions.

Why is Daniel Jackson eneligible to win the brownlow?? I know hes got no hope but i was just curious because i know we didnt have anyone rubbed out this year.
Also i thought Richo was snubbed by the AFL and was not invited to the brownlow. Now the website says he is invited.

 

[W. Smithers]

Didn't Jackson tackle a saints player a little too rough and got a reprimand?

 

[PHX]

Just a couple of quick questions.

Why is Daniel Jackson eneligible to win the brownlow?? I know hes got no hope but i was just curious because i know we didnt have anyone rubbed out this year.
Also i thought Richo was snubbed by the AFL and was not invited to the brownlow. Now the website says he is invited.

Yes because his tackle was too hard rolleyes it was assessed at 125 points but since he pleaded guilty it was 93.5 however the rules state its what it was before the reduction counts and since it was 100+ he is ineligible even though he didnt miss a game.

 

[bigrayohall20]

Didn't Jackson tackle a saints player a little too rough and got a reprimand?

What a bloody joke that is! Ineligible because he tackled a player to rough.

 

[beaver fever]

Also i thought Richo was snubbed by the AFL and was not invited to the brownlow. Now the website says he is invited.

I'm pretty sure that although he got an invitation, he declined it to give another richmond player the experience.

 

[CoggaRules]

Just a couple of quick questions.

Why is Daniel Jackson eneligible to win the brownlow?? I know hes got no hope but i was just curious because i know we didnt have anyone rubbed out this year.
Also i thought Richo was snubbed by the AFL and was not invited to the brownlow. Now the website says he is invited.

man, you really need to get a life dude. I mean, this is the question that reverberates in your mind? I mean, wouldnt it have been easier to answer it yourself, by just saying, his chances of winning it are that low that being inelligible is better?
i.e. there are ineligible players that stood more of a chance of winning it if Jacko was eligible.

 

[bigrayohall20]

man, you really need to get a life dude. I mean, this is the question that reverberates in your mind? I mean, wouldnt it have been easier to answer it yourself, by just saying, his chances of winning it are that low that being inelligible is better?
i.e. there are ineligible players that stood more of a chance of winning it if Jacko was eligible.

Was just curious CR. Only because i knew we hadnt had anyone get suspended.
So i suppose i better get busy getting a life then!

 

[CoggaRules]

Was just curious CR. Only because i knew we hadnt had anyone get suspended.
So i suppose i better get busy getting a life then!

its cool dude, just having a lend of ya. Lets just say he might be ineligible because they dont want to have negative numbers on the tally board..

 

[bigrayohall20]

its cool dude, just having a lend of ya. Lets just say he might be ineligible because they dont want to have negative numbers on the tally board..

Good point. JON could be in trouble then.

 

[deliberate!!]

Just a couple of quick questions.

Why is Daniel Jackson eneligible to win the brownlow?? I know hes got no hope but i was just curious because i know we didnt have anyone rubbed out this year.
Also i thought Richo was snubbed by the AFL and was not invited to the brownlow. Now the website says he is invited.

A polite phrase would be 'developmentally challenged'....

 

[CoggaRules]

Good point. JON could be in trouble then.

dont know about you dude, but our brownlow tally is going to be embarrasing. And that includes Foleys total. He might get around 9 and the you can go down from there for the rest. As for the rest? the number of players in that "rest" will be about 4 if that and thats it...

 

[deliberate!!]

dont know about you dude, but our brownlow tally is going to be embarrasing. And that includes Foleys total. He might get around 9 and the you can go down from there for the rest. As for the rest? the number of players in that "rest" will be about 4 if that and thats it...

No we'll be right, Kane Johnson to win the Brownlow....opps.....sorry...wrong B&F !!

 

[CoggaRules]

No we'll be right, Kane Johnson to win the Brownlow....opps.....sorry...wrong B&F !!

havent you heard the latest? they are now awarding the brownlow to players that were assigned specific jobs by the coach and carried them out. They have realised its not about who is the Best and Fairest player,its all about who follows orders best.

 

[bigrayohall20]

dont know about you dude, but our brownlow tally is going to be embarrasing. And that includes Foleys total. He might get around 9 and the you can go down from there for the rest. As for the rest? the number of players in that "rest" will be about 4 if that and thats it...

Yeah he should get around that. I think Richo will be the only other Tiger to be any chance of reaching 10 votes.

 

[JSFish]

Yeah he should get around that. I think Richo will be the only other Tiger to be any chance of reaching 10 votes.

I have a dodgy feeling that we are gonna get absolutely robbed in the brownlow. Like, foley getting 4 or 5 votes. If the brownlow was top 5 on ground each match, i reckon foley would be in with a big shot. Who saw the phantom brownlow on the afl site. I know it must be a load of shit cos the guy who did it probably just looked back at the stats on the season and did the votes based on them, but foley got 4 votes, and richmond got 27 overall out of a possible 132. If anything like that happens in the real brownlow, im goin nuts

 

[jackson_rules]

I have a dodgy feeling that we are gonna get absolutely robbed in the brownlow. Like, foley getting 4 or 5 votes. If the brownlow was top 5 on ground each match, i reckon foley would be in with a big shot. Who saw the phantom brownlow on the afl site. I know it must be a load of shit cos the guy who did it probably just looked back at the stats on the season and did the votes based on them, but foley got 4 votes, and richmond got 27 overall out of a possible 132. If anything like that happens in the real brownlow, im goin nuts

yeah because based on our form we should get alot of votes

 

[JSFish]

yeah because based on our form we should get alot of votes

Yeah, but we should still get a decent number of votes. We lost a lot of games by not much. All i'm sayin is, in the phantom brownlow i saw, in a whole lot of games we lost at the start by 2-3 goals, we didn't get a vote. I just hope if someone played a good game, they get votes based on that, not based on the fact that the team lost the game