The Brownlow Medal should remove the "fairest" aspect

[HaroLad]

Because of this rule, the best player in the competition this year will not be winning the "best" player award.

The fact that a player can become ineligible due to a split second "decision" (if you can call it that) is a joke.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Inb4 some Geelong related retort in return....

 

[Thats Wright]

Appeal.

 

[HaroLad]

There's no way I think it deserved a suspension, but that doesn't matter.

No other sport in the world has this trivial requirement for their respective awards, if the AFL are changing rules so often they should change this too.

 

[HaroLad]

Appeal.

I don't think the club will appeal, but even if they do and are successful, this still needs looking at.

 

[OhhhhhCyril]

That didn't take long..

 

[ashep]

Cry me a river. He can still win the MVP and the coaches award.

It's one particular award with a specific requirement.

 

[Slats]

Because of this rule, the best player in the competition this year will not be winning the "best" player award.

The fact that a player can become ineligible due to a split second "decision" (if you can call it that) is a joke.

BREAKING: Geelong flood warning due to Cats supporters' tears.

 

[Struggle]

Maybe they should remove the best aspect

 

[Toump Ass]

Have a cry mate. You'll feel better.

 

[brahj]

Because of this rule, the best player in the competition this year will not be winning the "best" player award.

The fact that a player can become ineligible due to a split second "decision" (if you can call it that) is a joke.

nice melt

 

[Thats Wright]

There's no way I think it deserved a suspension, but that doesn't matter.

No other sport in the world has this trivial requirement for their respective awards, if the AFL are changing rules so often they should change this too.

Hawthorn endorse this thread.

 

[Milanista28]

Geelong fans are S T Ruggling lol.

 

[Hubnester]

But it's not the best player award. It's the best and fairest player award. You can be the best player but not the fairest. Not saying I think Dangerfield is the best nor that his suspension was the right call.

 

[Doggies_13]

Because of this rule, the best player in the competition this year will not be winning the "best" player award.

The fact that a player can become ineligible due to a split second "decision" (if you can call it that) is a joke.

So let's go back and give Chris grant his medal and all the other guys who missed out cause of suspensions. And strip the guys who got awarded the medal in those years of their medals.

Take your Geelong hat and Geelong glasses off. Dangerfield was by the letter of the law rightly suspended. Don't like it get the rule changed but carrying on like a spoilt child and wanting the change the biggest award in football for one bloke is ridiculous

 

[ashep]

Because of this rule, the best player in the competition this year will not be winning the "best" player award.

The fact that a player can become ineligible due to a split second "decision" (if you can call it that) is a joke.

It's not the "best" player award. It's the "best & fairest" player.

If you don't drop the fairest requirement then this thread is null and void so you've actually created a contradiction where none previously existed.

 

[HairyO]

There's no way I think it deserved a suspension, but that doesn't matter.

No other sport in the world has this trivial requirement for their respective awards, if the AFL are changing rules so often they should change this too.

Maybe it having this requirement is what makes it so special. Its not even a best and fairest.

Its a fairest and best.

There are 101 awards for best players. Only one for the fairest and best. The AFL should never be allowed to change that. Or the Brownlow family should ask for their name back.

Maybe they should remove the best aspect

Agreed.

 

[Stopher]

Give Jobe his medal back then. Grant and McKernan waiting for theirs too.

Oh and strip Cotch, Mitchell and Harvey (his '97 one!) of theirs.

Ridiculous.

 

[HaroLad]

The salt in this thread is amazing.

The football community in general is so anti-Geelong.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Rather than removing the fairest from the best and fairest let's remove the unfair players by making them ineligible if they are suspended.

 

[Forward Press]

 

[quotemokc]

If it was changed to just "best" then you would have to remove the aspect of umpires voting.

 

[THE THIN MAN]

Because of this rule, the best player in the competition this year will not be winning the "best" player award.

The fact that a player can become ineligible due to a split second "decision" (if you can call it that) is a joke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownlow_Medal

The Brownlow is Fairest and Best player, individual clubs have Best and Fairest!

 

[Thats Wright]

But it's not the best player award. It's the best and fairest player award. You can be the best player but not the fairest. Not saying I think Dangerfield is the best nor that his suspension was the right call.

There certainly is a difference between a sniping cheat...say Sam Mitchell targeting Ablett in a grand final and tackling ruckman too well.

Fairest is important to keep the cheats in line. Doesn't necessarily mean the aggressive or even unnecessarily temperamental at times can't achieve.

 

[GPW1]

The fact that a player can become ineligible due to a split second "decision" (if you can call it that) is a joke.

Agree. There is no way Barry Hall should of been ineligible for the Brownlow when he made the split second decision to knock Staker's lights out.