Ch9 AFL Division 7 - 2015

[Harry49]

I think the coaches should discuss after games.

Only downside with coaches doing the votes is if one is a little bias or wants to push the agenda of a certain player - especially if they think that player is getting close or a chance to win the medal.

No easy answer, leave it as is, nothing is perfect but generally I think the results end up right even if a few blokes are robbed/gifted votes - anything below top 3 doesn't really count for much anyway..

Yeah, definitely a good point! There's definitely no option that wont come under scrutiny. Unless coaches and umpires discuss it and then umpires make the final call. Something needs to change. The fact i polled the same as Jai McMurtrie makes it a little embarrassing.

[BZB27]

I think the coaches should discuss after games.

Only downside with coaches doing the votes is if one is a little bias or wants to push the agenda of a certain player - especially if they think that player is getting close or a chance to win the medal.

No easy answer, leave it as is, nothing is perfect but generally I think the results end up right even if a few blokes are robbed/gifted votes - anything below top 3 doesn't really count for much anyway..

Yeah, definitely a good point! There's definitely no option that wont come under scrutiny. Unless coaches and umpires discuss it and then umpires make the final call. Something needs to change. The fact i polled the same as Jai McMurtrie makes it a little embarrassing.

Ill be getting into him tonight that i did also

[Robb_Stark]

how much does it cost to get in tomorrow

[Footy Chick]

Get dropped from the B's ?

[Lightning McQueen]

Get dropped from the B's ?

He's paying for "Rent a crowd"

[S Demon]

I think the coaches should discuss after games.

Only downside with coaches doing the votes is if one is a little bias or wants to push the agenda of a certain player - especially if they think that player is getting close or a chance to win the medal.

No easy answer, leave it as is, nothing is perfect but generally I think the results end up right even if a few blokes are robbed/gifted votes - anything below top 3 doesn't really count for much anyway..

What if the coaches did it for the opposition team - coach of HV picks 3,2,1 for NH and NH coach picks 3,2,1 for HV..?

[morell]

[S Demon]

sorry mate, didn't read back far enough to see your post about the coaches doing it. It definitely has merit

[morell]

Hahaha nah its not you, you're spot on, just getting sick of every single idea or thought process of mine getting smacked down. Despite science, logic, evidence, natural law and every other reasonable measure pointing to it at least having merit.

Amazing how many time I've posted something and have people smash the concept...wait a few pages of posts then someone else coming in and either saying the exact same thing I have but in a different way or completely agreeing with what I have said.

Starting to learn that the amateur football circles are sycophantic - and this forum even more so.

[human_torpedo]

I like the coaches doing it, as long as they don't pick just opposition players.. Ie. both coaches pick a top 5 or top 3 from the game and they count towards the medal.. Having opposition pick 3 from each club wouldn't sit well with me, especially in lop sided games where a side gets a 3-2-1 and lose by 25 goals..

[Footy Chick]

It's not that. Most people are just naturally scared of change so they mock any suggestion of it.

[morell]

Also, found out last night that a couple of our players polled...

and didn't even play...

And people expect us to take the award seriously.

[Lightning McQueen]

Also, found out last night that a couple of our players polled...

and didn't even play...

And people expect us to take the award seriously.

I wouldn't be admitting that.

[morell]

I double checked, our team sheets were correct, the umpires must have written the wrong name down. Or selected the emergency.

And in one circumstance he was named but didn't get any game time.

[Footy Chick]

or you were playing people under false names

[morell]

Have you met Wayne? Do you reckon he would allow that? Pls, our coaches aren't allowed to fart in the wrong direction under his stewardship.

C.Weekley was named in round 9. He's a registered player, he is all above board. He did not get a single kick in said game - I think we were one short and named him to sit on the bench just in case someone got hurt after he played in the B's.

He got a vote in that game. Pretty sure they umps meant ...

B.Weekley. Our captain and pretty good bloody player.

[Q.]

You have to pick from the team sheet, I don't see how it's possible to give votes to someone not on the team sheet?

[morell]

Yeah Craig was on the team sheet and named in sporting pule and probably even suited up after the magoos I suspect, but he didn't actually get on the field or get a kick.

Yet he got a vote.

They clearly meant B.Weekley, not C.Weekley. Whether they wrote it down wrong or picked the wrong dude in sporting pulse, I don't know.

Point is.

THEY SHOULDN'T BE VOTING ANYWAY BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING

[Footy Chick]

*sigh*

and you all think I can get on a high horse.

sheesh....

[Lightning McQueen]

Yeah Craig was on the team sheet and named in sporting pule and probably even suited up after the magoos I suspect, but he didn't actually get on the field or get a kick.

Yet he got a vote.

They clearly meant B.Weekley, not C.Weekley. Whether they wrote it down wrong or picked the wrong dude in sporting pulse, I don't know.

Point is.

THEY SHOULDN'T BE VOTING ANYWAY BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING

Is he extremely good looking?