The Brownlow Medal should remove the "fairest" aspect

[Zty27]

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

Got to be kidding! The award was for the fairest and best back in the early days....like when it was a sport played by sportsmen...not a promoted entertainment event like Las Vegas....it is becoming. Not sure that Dangerfields tackle was any different to Waite's earlier in the year and he got two. Get over it

 

[_RT_]

Dusty gives Robertson a love tap because he was being a prick and the media spent 24 hours looking at ways for Dusty to get suspended, Dangerfield pile drives Kreuzers head into the ground and the same media spend 2 days looking at how the MRP can give him a free pass.

You cant have 2 sets of rules just because of a players standing in the game. A fringe player does the same act and nobody would bat an eyelid and that is wrong.

 

[david addison]

No, just excuse players who were suspended for acts deemed 'intentional'.

 

[fairfooty]

The brownlow medal is fine as is.

Want to win it ? DON'T GET SUSPENDED

It's pretty simple concept and easy to abide by.

Thank goodness - finally someone talks some sense.

 

[Zty27]

The Brownlow has never been the 'Best' player award, it has always been 'Best & Fairest'. Whether or not Dangerfield should have received a week is a different issue. Personally I thought be was unlucky, just as I thought Cam McCarthy was unlucky for his Gilbert tackle. I hope somebodu else wins it outright, as it will take a bit of shine off it if Dangerfield polls the most votes. If Dangerfield gets the most Brownlow votes but is eligible I will feel sorry for him, just as I did Chris Grant and Corey McKernan. At the end of the day it is just a medal, Dangerfield already has one, I doubt it will cost him any recognition or opportunities. Football-wise the week off might be the best thing for him to be fresher for finals.

 

[Zty27]

Beg to differ. It was introduced as the fairest and best. All this talk about the best player is irrelevant. It is both fairest and best. The AFL over the years have watered down the ineligibility criteria to, wrongly in my view, allow transgressors to remain eligible. Cats..get over it...just like North did with Corey McKernan

 

[tenderwarrior]

Beg to differ. It was introduced as the fairest and best. All this talk about the best player is irrelevant. It is both fairest and best. The AFL over the years have watered down the ineligibility criteria to, wrongly in my view, allow transgressors to remain eligible. Cats..get over it...just like North did with Corey McKernan

you quoted my post but didn't comment

 

[Mr_Moogle]

The whole premise of this thread is just embarassing.

 

[Messenger]

The whole premise of this thread is just embarassing.

Absolutely. This thread is a nine page salt lick.

The only way to stop a fair player losing the medal is to remove the fair criterion.

 

[Marcus DuQuesne]

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

 

[Marcus DuQuesne]

I would actually be happier if this award was done away with. Anything that involves umpires cannot be taken seriously. Anyone who holds their breath looking forward to Brownlow night is on something I do not want to know about. I call it the Downlow Medal fits better. The week Dangerfield got is farcical in terms of AFL.

 

[Marcus DuQuesne]

Thank goodness - finally someone talks some sense.

Sometimes getting suspended is out of your control. So no, not talking sense.

 

[fairfooty]

Sometimes getting suspended is out of your control. So no, not talking sense.

Yes talking sense. For once the MRP assessed it correctly and handed down a fair and reasonable penalty.

A player was concussed by an incorrect tackle (correct technique does not injure players). Concussive syndrome is serious and potentially life altering, the AFL quite rightly has made the head sacrosanct, everyone knows it, so suspension is appropriate (and the penalty has nothing to do with Brownlow eligibility - nor should it).

And the really annoying thing is if it was anyone else we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'm genuinely sorry Patty is now ineligible for the Brownlow but that's a minor detail compared to the effects of brain injury - and as someone who worked in the field for years, I'm really tired of the BF dinosaurs who seem to think concussion and brain injury is nothing more than a chipped nail and a minor inconvenience.

 

[firefighter]

No they don't need to remove the fairest aspect from the medal at all, they just need to consider what is fair or unfair. Accident happen all the time in contact sports and missing a week because of an accident shouldn't count against you.

Yes SAdelaide and Whorke fans I'm only saying this because it's Danger, I know.

 

[Marcus DuQuesne]

Well

Yes talking sense. For once the MRP assessed it correctly and handed down a fair and reasonable penalty.

A player was concussed by an incorrect tackle (correct technique does not injure players). Concussive syndrome is serious and potentially life altering, the AFL quite rightly has made the head sacrosanct, everyone knows it, so suspension is appropriate (and the penalty has nothing to do with Brownlow eligibility - nor should it).

And the really annoying thing is if it was anyone else we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'm genuinely sorry Patty is now ineligible for the Brownlow but that's a minor detail compared to the effects of brain injury - and as someone who worked in the field for years, I'm really tired of the BF dinosaurs who seem to think concussion and brain injury is nothing more than a chipped nail and a minor inconvenience.

It is really weird how Kruezer goes on to be arguably Carltons best player the following week. Concussed he was not. So your emotional argument carries no weight in this instance. So I repeat you talk Nonsense.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Couldn't give a rats arse about the Brownlow. Though it was a joke years ago. Ablett Snr, Carey, Matthews. Never won one. So it's obviously not for the best player. Keep as is.

 

[fairfooty]

Well

It is really weird how Kruezer goes on to be arguably Carltons best player the following week. Concussed he was not. So your emotional argument carries no weight in this instance. So I repeat you talk Nonsense.

He was assessed as being concussed. Unless you were the assessing medico (and as a Geelong supporter its fairly safe to assume you are not), it says far more about you than it does about me.

For you to ignore the facts around brain injury research and the effects of concussion and label a factual post as emotional just shows your complete ignorance. Brain injury (concussion), once or multiple can be permanent and life altering. Greg Williams, Sam Shaw, Scott Stevens and others are all examples. The research out of the US is definitive (and they wear helmets, which shows because of the mechanics of concussion helmets don't help - in fact they may contribute to the problem).

The AFL is sitting on a time bomb and they know it - so Grundy will get 1-2 weeks after his tackle on Brown yesterday until players and dinosaur supporters get the message. And as someone who saw the long-term devastation of these brain injuries I'm glad it's being addressed. The community should not have to bear the long-term cost, never mind former players and their families.