AFL Hall of Fame - Loewe and Burke

[Eastern]

There has been quite a bit of media today surrounding Wayne Carey and whether he should be admitted to the Hall of Fame.

This got me thinking that both Burkey & Stewie must be eligable this year. Both are 300+ game players, both represented the Big V on numerous occasions, both have been All Australians, both have carried themselves with dignity throughout and beyond their footy careers, Burkie was runner up in the Brownlow. I would suggest that both fit all the criteria for admission into the AFL Hall of Fame !!

[TimeToShineFellas]

How many years retired do ex-players need to be before being inducted into the Hall of Fame?

[Eastern]

How many years retired do ex-players need to be before being inducted into the Hall of Fame?

I think 3 full years, meaning that they needed to have retired by the end of 2004 to be eligable !!

[Armoooo]

Good luck to them, would be great to see them in there
While neither of them got to taste true onfield success they have carried themselves greatly off field and are genuine good blokes unlike a lot of the others....

[karnak]

Maybe Carey will be joining Cousins in the AFL Hall of Shame.

[Go Sretnias Go]

Burke and Loewe, two of the great ambassadors of the game. If they are not admitted to the Hall of Fame, then the whole system is a joke.

How do players get nominated anyway - is it by their Club or is it an idividual such as K.Bartlett?

Let's make sure it happens because they are both more than eligable.

[riccardo]

If Gary Ablett is allowed in, its basically open slather.

[SENsei]

If Gary Ablett is allowed in, its basically open slather.

Personally, I think people should be admitted based on their footballing exploits and achievements, rather than what sort of bloke they are in real life.

Just my view.

[TimeToShineFellas]

If Gary Ablett is allowed in, its basically open slather.

Can see where you're coming from on that, but I lean towards SENsaintsational's point of view.

Some of those in the Hall of Fame haven't been exactly angels off-field either.

[Eastern]

I'm not fully up to date with the criteria but, is Burkey allowed to be inducted seeing that he is still involved as a director of the club? !!

[ctqs]

If Gary Ablett is allowed in, its basically open slather.

Personally, I think people should be admitted based on their footballing exploits and achievements, rather than what sort of bloke they are in real life.

Just my view.

Yeah, that's a fair call. The only concern I have, though, is that the Hall of Fame should be the game's showcase, and I don't know whether I'd want the likes of Carey and Ablett promoting my product.

[SENsei]

If Gary Ablett is allowed in, its basically open slather.

Personally, I think people should be admitted based on their footballing exploits and achievements, rather than what sort of bloke they are in real life.

Just my view.

Yeah, that's a fair call. The only concern I have, though, is that the Hall of Fame should be the game's showcase, and I don't know whether I'd want the likes of Carey and Ablett promoting my product.

Yeah, that's another argument. And I'd agree. Ablett and Carey are tainted.

Brereton is no cleanskin either, but he seems to escape much criticism.

Let's chuck up a hypothetical. Ron Barassi is charged with some criminal offence....he rode over a homeless guy whilst on one of his treks. Spat in his face. Abused police.

Would that make Ron Barassi any less an AFL legend?

I see the argument about their off field stuff, but surely the Hall of Fame should be based on their footballing ability and achievements only.

Let's say Akermanis is up for it. We think he's a dill. He's controversial. But a Brownlow Medallist. Should he be knocked back because he's outspoken and disagreeable?

It is a tough call. I fall onto the side of football only as the criteria.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

i think each club nominates players for the hall of fame each year and the reveiw pannel decide who gets in

i think to be in the hall of fame you should at least have some level of respect for your out of football life as well as you onfeild role

[st_Trav_ofWA]

If Gary Ablett is allowed in, its basically open slather.

Personally, I think people should be admitted based on their footballing exploits and achievements, rather than what sort of bloke they are in real life.

Just my view.

Yeah, that's a fair call. The only concern I have, though, is that the Hall of Fame should be the game's showcase, and I don't know whether I'd want the likes of Carey and Ablett promoting my product.

Yeah, that's another argument. And I'd agree. Ablett and Carey are tainted.

Brereton is no cleanskin either, but he seems to escape much criticism.

Let's chuck up a hypothetical. Ron Barassi is charged with some criminal offence....he rode over a homeless guy whilst on one of his treks. Spat in his face. Abused police.

Would that make Ron Barassi any less an AFL legend?

I see the argument about their off field stuff, but surely the Hall of Fame should be based on their footballing ability and achievements only.

Let's say Akermanis is up for it. We think he's a dill. He's controversial. But a Brownlow Medallist. Should he be knocked back because he's outspoken and disagreeable?

It is a tough call. I fall onto the side of football only as the criteria.

aker should be fine cause although he is a dill he hasnt done things the greater comunity would deem as unsavory.

as a footballer you do have a responcability to be a role model as a hall of famer i would expect that to be an absoulte