Yes that's true. Listening to KB trying to justify it yesterday on Hungry for Sport was pure Gold. Jon Ralph asked the question if the AA Committee was that much out of touch with public opinion. He tried to justify it by saying that if it was a public vote Krakouer would have still won because there are so many Collingwood supporters and how loyal they are, but I'm pretty sure that every poll I've seen has been a 70/30 spilt in favour of Walkers mark.
If they think that Krakouer's mark was so much better, then they should stop using Walker's for promotional purposes and start using Krakouers.
This argument that one club's supporters will sully the vote doesn't wash with me.
Let's assume that because it is a Collingwood player they get an extra 5,000 votes because people are voting for it just because it is Collingwood.
That would get neutralised by supporters of other clubs (who don't have a player in the final 3) who judge it based on which one they think is best
That is 14 clubs x 5,000 votes.
So bartlett is saying he prefers a dictatorship over giving the vote to the people as the people can't be trusted with the vote.
What else did Bartlett say>? - I didn't hear his interview.
Did he say Krakeour's mark was a "pack mark" with two people in the pack?