sorry crows

[RooDog]

History will show that a forward has minimal chance of winning. Now I don't agree with it but thats how it pans out. When was the last time a forward won it???????

It will be a LONG LONG while before Tredders can get one. Carey back-chatting to the umpies has nothing to do with him not winning one. Its a myth dribbled out by media, players and officials. Whether or not a player mouths off on an umpire has a minimal effect. The medal is not given out for being a nice guy it being given out to the best player in the eyes of the umpires. In fact every superstar in their choosen sport is as arrogant as they come.

Tredrea doesn't need a Charlie to be recognised as a top player.

actually stiffy careys back chat was one of the main reasons... take it from a pro... they will not give you votes if you argue with them... there are other examples of this im sure but carey is one of the prime examples and its why he didnt get 3 against essendon this year because he argued with the umpires in that game

 

[lozstar]

I was watching an interview with Carey... I think it the dvd released about him..
and in this interview, they had about him not winning the brownlow, when he was the red hot favorite..
He said the main reason was that basically his back-chat to the umpires cost him.

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

cant agree Stiff. Ive been around Umpires for a fair bit of time, and i can say that in my experiences (admittedly, with the AFL being a more professional competition, it may not apply as much), if a player mouths off at umpires his chances of receiving a 50/50 free let a lone best on ground votes, diminishes. its a best and fiarest award after all, so whats fair about continually chastisising (sp?) the umpires?? whilst many wont agree, why would an umpire give a player votes who continually gives him an earful??

I dont know about that, if a free kick is there the umpire will pay it regardless of who it is. You cant give a player a hard time because he opens his mouth.
Obviously if the player continually goes over the line in regards to abusing an umpire it might minimize his chances of getting votes. If this is the case however an umpire should not be waiting until the end of the game to punish him in regards to not giving him votes. If it is a problem on the field the umpire should deal with it there by means of a 50 or something. If the umpire does not do this then he has no reason not to give the player the votes he deserved.

 

[Tyson20]

I dont know about that, if a free kick is there the umpire will pay it regardless of who it is. You cant give a player a hard time because he opens his mouth.
Obviously if the player continually goes over the line in regards to abusing an umpire it might minimize his chances of getting votes. If this is the case however an umpire should not be waiting until the end of the game to punish him in regards to not giving him votes. If it is a problem on the field the umpire should deal with it there by means of a 50 or something. If the umpire does not do this then he has no reason not to give the player the votes he deserved.

no question the Umpire should (and nine times out of ten will) deal with it out on the field, but when it comes down to a player who opened his mouth all day or one who got on with the job, who do you think the umpires will give the votes too???

your also correct in that umpires will pay a free regardless of who the player is, but there are circumstances where an umpire wont give a player a 50/50 free because of the mouthful they received 5 mins before hand! Umpires remember who the players are that yap to them, believe me!

 

[afc9798]

no question the Umpire should (and nine times out of ten will) deal with it out on the field, but when it comes down to a player who opened his mouth all day or one who got on with the job, who do you think the umpires will give the votes too???

your also correct in that umpires will pay a free regardless of who the player is, but there are circumstances where an umpire wont give a player a 50/50 free because of the mouthful they received 5 mins before hand! Umpires remember who the players are that yap to them, believe me!

Anyone care to explain Greg Williams or Tony Lockett then?

 

[Stiffy_18]

Anyone care to explain Greg Williams or Tony Lockett then?

My point exactly

and one of them is a forward too

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

the the whole fairest bit is a sham because Im sure Brown polled votes in the game he KO'd Grant. Correct me If Im wrong
I think maybe umpires are too precious in regards to abuse coming their way...forget that just give it to the best player on the ground. If the abuse is getting out of hand cover your arse and give 50 after 50 so people understand what is happening.
No good just taking the abuse all day and then refusing to give them votes. Then come Brownlow night people will remember that was the day such and such gave away 3 50m penalties and people will understand why they didnt recieve any votes.

 

[naughty monkey]

Anyone care to explain Greg Williams or Tony Lockett then?

a testament to just how good they were!