Unpopular opinion - you shouldn’t be rubbed out from the Brownlow if suspended

[Underarm]

Some seem to be taking me the wrong way, I wanted to simply put the topic up for discussion, I’ve had this opinion way before Fyfe or Dangerfield were even around. Fyfe deserved to be suspended, it was a stupid and reckless act. My problem with the rule is that one of these days someone is going to miss out on a deserved Brownlow because of a stupid decision by the flip flopping MRP. The award should stay the “Best and fairest” never said it shouldn’t, I just wish there was better way to judge the “fair” part. Man people are brutal on bigfooty lol

Brownlow medal favourites are already a protected species when it comes to reports and fines vs suspensions. Nat Fyfe in 2015, Dustin Martin and Cotchin last year.

 

[the harry]

Also matt priddis is a brownlow medalist.

Joel selwood,buddy,wayne carey, josh kennedy,pendles, etc are not.

No one believes ploddis is better than any of the above players or about 200 other players who never won one

Buddy has polled votes that would have won other years though.

Cousins won with only 21 votes.

I'm sure the others have polled reasonable numbers too, just someone went better.

 

[mightymouse75]

Brent Harvey says hi. And he has been pinched 500 times

 

[mightymouse75]

Lucky afl is not sport anymore , just low brow entertainment or I would get upset ..

 

[telsor]

Do Corey Mckernan and Chris Grant get it retrospectively?

Do they players who beat them those years get their medals taken off them?

 

[Schauermann]

How many weeks did Mark Yeates get?

The game used to be so much fun in the past. Too bad I missed those days...

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

He's stiff. Fyfe is not a dirty player, and the Brownlow rules are intended to disqualify dirty players.
Wait and see how he goes before the tribunal I guess, it's a sign of the times.

 

[Pessimistic]

The reason Dusty will be remembered more fondly than Danger is because Dusty does seem down to earth. Danger is just a pretty boy who would eat his own s**t and drink his own piss.

Gaz wouldve been my comparison but he lost all respect with the Suns fiasco.

Rory Sloane being another obvious choice for someone who is actually down to earth as opposed to Danger who is so far up his own ass.

Anyway, back on topic, 5 years ago I wouldve said nah get ****** but considering what MC and the Tribunal give suspensions for its ludicrous that a mistimed tackle rubs you out for the biggest award.

With that being said, Fyfe needed a week for that. I actually laughed when Fox Footy said Tom Mitchell's incident was the precedent. Chalk and cheese.

Pretty boy?

 

[Damon_3388]

Based on actual impact this year, plus the Dockers' record, Fyfe shouldn't even end up top 5 in the Brownlow anyway, so this suspension should really have no significance when it comes to the count.

And no, I don't give a stuff if betting odds or coaches votes disagree with me.

 

[A Swallow]

Do they players who beat them those years get their medals taken off them?

McKernan was equal with Hird & Voss. So that year wouldn’t be too hard.

 

[Dunger]

Also matt priddis is a brownlow medalist.

Joel selwood,buddy,wayne carey, josh kennedy,pendles, etc are not.

No one believes ploddis is better than any of the above players or about 200 other players who never won one

Clearly the umpires do mate

 

[Farang83150]

"The Charles Brownlow Trophy, better known as the Brownlow Medal, is awarded to the "best and fairest" player in the Australian Football League during the home-and-away season"
Why does it need to be changed?
It's the highest individual accolade in our game and to get your hands on it you need to display that in every home and away game of that season, if a players suspended for an unfair act then why do they deserve the highest honour available?
IMO they don't.
Fyfe got what he deserved(say what you like about how you think he deserves it, but it's obvious to all and sundry why you posted what you did), if it's over ruled then it's just another farce along with so many managed by the AFL.

 

[dave123]

I have no issue with the rules

Its fairest abd best.

Its tradition

 

[Jack Bradley]

Chris Grant says Hi.

Corey Mckernan says Hi'er

 

[Jack Bradley]

Honestly I don't really give a s**t about the Brownlow medal. Its an award for midfielders only and past recipients have diminished the prestige of the award anyway.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I really don't care about the Brownlow, but I imagine the "fairest" component was necessary in the first half of the 20th century because of the amount of thuggery that took place in the games, possibly even up to the 1970s or 80s. Since then, we see players being suspended for some relatively soft incidents that would never have been suspended 30 or 40 years ago.

For some time I've thought the award should go simply to the most brilliant player only. They've already forfeited votes for matches missed and that should be penalty enough. Not sure I believe in Brownlow Medals though. A game which preaches the team aspect of sport, and the most prestigious award goes to an individual.

 

[Big Blood]

Can we just rub out the Brownlow? Meaningless, bloated, self-indulgent event.

 

[caitsith01]

I think you're looking for the AFLPA MVP award.

 

[MrDanggazz]

Can we just rub out the Brownlow? Meaningless, bloated, self-indulgent event.

But it’s tradition !

 

[AndyLucimitis]

But it’s tradition !

...and can we please call it 'Charlie' in that Bruce McAvaney cringey sort of way.

 

[PhatBoy]

Clearly the umpires do mate

Well no, they don’t. They just believed that in a particular season his level reached a point that the others didn’t that particular season

 

[Carson Dial]

Can we just rub out the Brownlow? Meaningless, bloated, self-indulgent event.

AFL is the most interesting political drama screening at the moment.

 

[Toump Ass]

Highest individual honour

If we didn't arbitrarily exclude players due to suspensions or have part-time umpires vote on the winner, then we'd be giving the "highest individual honour" to the best player of the year. And we can't have that because the AFL would lose all the gambling revenue from the Brownlow Crapshoot.

 

[the harry]

If we didn't arbitrarily exclude players due to suspensions or have part-time umpires vote on the winner, then we'd be giving the "highest individual honour" to the best player of the year. And we can't have that because the AFL would lose all the gambling revenue from the Brownlow Crapshoot.

How much turnover would happen on the Brownlow?

I'd rather umpires voting than either media personalities who are routinely incorrect and regularly ridiculed for poorly informed opinions fueled by their biases, or players who don't watch much football according to every interview ever and aren't exactly the brightest people, generally speaking.

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

I think the fundamental problem is the AFL suffers from on Brownlow night is suspension inflation- players are getting rubbed out way more easily than twenty years ago when you actually had to do something pretty crook to get weeks off.

Also, the stereotypical big powerful mids who dominate Brownlow voting are disproportionately at risk of 1 week, reckless type suspensions, because they spend more time in traffic and around the contest than most players- they are in more collisions than average which means more chance of them mistiming something.

A far more proportionate way of dealing with it which would maintain the fairest and best tradition whilst preventing farces where the obvious best player misses the medal for a bullshit one week suspension would be to impose a -3 vote penalty for every week a player misses due to suspension. So a two week suspension would mean you need 26 votes to win it in a year where the next best player polls 19.