| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| doriswilgus wrote: | | Simple question:Do you think Howe would have won with that mark if he had still been playing for Melbourne?I do. |
BEYOND any shadow of a doubt !! 
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
 |
Stinger
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
Location: Canberra
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | Eh, these are very subjective awards, I have no problem with a fan vote. Isn't that what they're about? Exciting the fans with a great mark or goal? "Experts" don't really have a role in judging that.
Personally I thought Daniher would win due to his mark being overhead, not a chest mark but I've not viewed them very closely. |
If you want to involve the fans, have them vote on the finalists. Then put the nominees to a panel to select the best one.
How is it that the AFL constantly make the wrong decision, without thinking through the consequences of their actions? |
|
|
|
|
T2 
T2
Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Agreed Stinger. The process is back to front. |
|
|
|
|
ronrat
Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand
|
| Post subject: | |
|
And let us not forget a boundary maggot cost Daisy Thomas goal of the year.
_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Stinger wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | Eh, these are very subjective awards, I have no problem with a fan vote. Isn't that what they're about? Exciting the fans with a great mark or goal? "Experts" don't really have a role in judging that.
Personally I thought Daniher would win due to his mark being overhead, not a chest mark but I've not viewed them very closely. |
If you want to involve the fans, have them vote on the finalists. Then put the nominees to a panel to select the best one.
How is it that the AFL constantly make the wrong decision, without thinking through the consequences of their actions? |
I seem to be out of step here, but when did we start treating these awards so seriously? Surely they're just a bit of fun? Unlike the Brownlow they have no impact on a player's future.
We celebrate these goals and marks because they excite the crowd. I see no problem with the public picking the winner. I don't see a place for an expert panel. What would they be basing their judgement on anyway? And we'd have exactly the same outrage if a select panel made a decision that people disagreed with, or even more so, corrupt AFL and all that.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | | K wrote: | | PyreneesPie wrote: | On Fox Footy tonight - Gerard said it was an absolute travesty that Jeremy Howe did not win and that the award is too important to be voted on by the public!! Both he and Robertson said likewise Buddy's goal was the best but that he get the least votes, being in a Sydney team.
... |
Buddy's running goal against Talia? That shouldn't have been a goal at all. After the third bounce he ran almost 25 metres. (Afterwards, the umpiring chief
conceded "20 metres".) This brings back bad memories of Jetta... |
It is what it is according to the rules of the game adjudicated by the umpires. If the umpires don't pay it, it's legal. So Buddy's goal was a great goal just as Gary Ablett's mark over Gary Pert was a great mark. |
I think Ablett's mark would have been great if he'd touched the ball at some point.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Yes - Ablett's mark had all the necessary hallmarks of greatness, except the ball. |
|
|
|
|
foreigner 
Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: Brisbane, QLD
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Didn't some of us say here that they voted for Grundy's mark and we were split between the two? Don't you think that cost him the MOTY? As fans we have failed him. not the AFL nor anyone else. It was awarded on popular vote and our vote was split between Howe and Grundy - simple as that.
_________________
Pies Forever |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| The combined Howe/Grundy vote was less than D's. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Thanks for the info. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
|
|
|
|
npalm
Joined: 01 May 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
On a slight tangent (and maybe a new thread required?) is the question as to whether Howe is the greatest mark in AFL\VFL history.
I can recall many players who were renowned for their speccies - Jesaulenko, Hart, Picken etc but in 50+ years of watching footy I can't recall any that consistently took hangers week in week out, year in year out, like Howe has.
The only players I can think of that were anywhere near as consistent as him are Russell Robertson and Sean Smith. (There must be something in the water down at Melbourne).
Really, when it comes to speccies, Howie stands head and shoulders over the rest. 
_________________
Side by side. |
|
|
|
|
Presti35 
Dick Lee for Legend Status
Joined: 05 Oct 2001
Location: London, England
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Sadly, the Essendon votes mixed with the Collingwood hater votes was enough to give Daniher the win. Collingwood votes somewhat divided, doesn't help either.
You could argue that Grundy's mark was better. And you could even argue that Howes second mark was better (Not a finalist, which was a disgrace in itself).
But you'd have to be crazy to think that Howe's first mark against Melbourne was not better than Danihers, which should not even have been in the final 3.
One of the greatest marks of all time losing to a very good grab. Honestly, its a disgrace. And the AFL has been embarrassed again.
_________________
A Goal Saved Is 2 Goals Earned! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | The combined Howe/Grundy vote was less than D's. |
Add a non Collingwood player instead of Grundy and the anti Collingwood vote would have been split. May have been enough for Howe to win.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
For those saying it shouldn't be the public voting, the last time we saw outrage over the result it was voted on by the AA panel: Krakouer winning over Walker.
It didn't make the Krakouer mark more popular than Walker's. In fact it had no impact on anything except that Krakouer got the prize and Carlton fans had a cry. It's really not important. The great marks and goals are always remembered, it doesn't matter whether they win the award or not.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
