Is Jack Steven now Ineligible to win the Rising Star?

[Jacks Back]

I just heard someone on SEN say that he now cannot win it because of the melee fine.

Bummer!

I think his form has been outstanding and he should definitely be in the mix to win it.

[plugger66]

Well whoever said it is wrong. Surely they were joking.

[Rosco]

yeah, need to have been suspended to lose eligibility

[plugger66]

yeah, need to have been suspended to lose eligibility

I think even then you can actually win it as long as the charge doesnt add up to 100 points.

[stkildathunda]

yeah, need to have been suspended to lose eligibility

I think even then you can actually win it as long as the charge doesnt add up to 100 points.

Same rules apply to the Rising Star as they do to the Brownlow when it comes to suspensions etc.

[plugger66]

yeah, need to have been suspended to lose eligibility

I think even then you can actually win it as long as the charge doesnt add up to 100 points.

Same rules apply to the Rising Star as they do to the Brownlow when it comes to suspensions etc.

So that would be right then. That is my understanding.

[saintbrat]

yeah, need to have been suspended to lose eligibility

I think even then you can actually win it as long as the charge doesnt add up to 100 points.

100 points equals 1 game so suspension will only be when 100 or over.

One young player is nominated for the award after each round of home-and-away matches, with a panel of experts choosing the winner at the end of the season. To qualify for the NAB AFL Rising Star nomination, a player must be under 21 years of age as at January 1 of that year, must not have played more than 10 games to the start of that season and must not have been suspended by the AFL or State League tribunals during the season.

http://www.afl.com.au/development/nabaf ... fault.aspx

[plugger66]

yeah, need to have been suspended to lose eligibility

I think even then you can actually win it as long as the charge doesnt add up to 100 points.

100 points equals 1 game so suspension will only be when 100 or over.

But you could still get charged with something that gives you less than 100 points and still be suspended. In that case you can still win it.

[BigMart]

Mainly because dyson heppell will s*** it in....

[plugger66]

Mainly because dyson heppell will s*** it in....

That is 100% correct but on current form he can finish anywhere from second to fifth.

[mohannair]

I think if you get reported you are in-eligible for te award, I am not sure whether a mele is a reportable offence.

On the same note Sammy Mitchell is in-eligible for Brownlow though he is not suspended but was reported.

Below article will explain in detail

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/t ... 6093349275

[plugger66]

I think if you get reported you are in-eligible for te award, I am not sure whether a mele is a reportable offence.

On the same note Sammy Mitchell is in-eligible for Brownlow though he is not suspended but was reported.

Below article will explain in detail

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/t ... 6093349275

The reportable offence needs to be 100 points is my understanding.

[#1GILL]

Mainly because dyson heppell will s*** it in....

Will probably win but others like Darling, Savage, Shuey, Smith and Swallow are a chance too depending on how the rest of the season plays out.

Steven's last half a dozen weeks have been better than probably all of the players listed above, but he doesn't have any media hype around him and we all know that these awards are influenced by that.

[Jacks Back]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me.

[plugger66]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me.

He wasnt but his charge attracted more than 100 points. It can work the other way though. The charge can be less than 100 points but you get a week but can still win the award.

[Megsie]

Jack is eligible to win rising star award.

[Bernard Shakey]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me. :roll:

He wasnt but his charge attracted more than 100 points. It can work the other way though. The charge can be less than 100 points but you get a week but can still win the award.

Rubbish, if you get suspended you can't win and there is no mention of points.

[plugger66]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me.

He wasnt but his charge attracted more than 100 points. It can work the other way though. The charge can be less than 100 points but you get a week but can still win the award.

Rubbish, if you get suspended you can't win and there is no mention of points.

Are you 100% sure as you have said rubbish. I think if you gt less than 100 points but are still suspended then you may still be eligible. Where did you find that information?

[plugger66]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me.

He wasnt but his charge attracted more than 100 points. It can work the other way though. The charge can be less than 100 points but you get a week but can still win the award.

Rubbish, if you get suspended you can't win and there is no mention of points.

You can apologize if you like. I doubt I will get one though.

Based on a decision by a separate Match Review Panel, players are levied a number of base demerit points, according to the severity of their offence;
The panel then adjusts the number of base points to a number of final demerit points, via additions (for a poor prior tribunal record), or deductions (for a good prior tribunal record or for lodging an early guilty plea).
Players are suspended for one match for every 100 final demerit points he has.

In terms of Brownlow Medal eligibility, a player becomes ineligible if he accrues more than 100 base points during the season; final points are irrelevant. This means that it is now possible for a player to be ineligible for the Brownlow Medal, despite not having served a suspension that season;[2] or, to be eligible for the Brownlow despite receiving a suspension.[3

I believe the Rising star has exactly the same criteria.

[Bernard Shakey]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me. :roll:

He wasnt but his charge attracted more than 100 points. It can work the other way though. The charge can be less than 100 points but you get a week but can still win the award.

Rubbish, if you get suspended you can't win and there is no mention of points.

You can apologize if you like. I doubt I will get one though.

Based on a decision by a separate Match Review Panel, players are levied a number of base demerit points, according to the severity of their offence;
The panel then adjusts the number of base points to a number of final demerit points, via additions (for a poor prior tribunal record), or deductions (for a good prior tribunal record or for lodging an early guilty plea).
Players are suspended for one match for every 100 final demerit points he has.

In terms of Brownlow Medal eligibility, a player becomes ineligible if he accrues more than 100 base points during the season; final points are irrelevant. This means that it is now possible for a player to be ineligible for the Brownlow Medal, despite not having served a suspension that season;[2] or, to be eligible for the Brownlow despite receiving a suspension.[3

I believe the Rising star has exactly the same criteria.

From the AFL website as referred to by saintbrat above:

"To qualify for the NAB AFL Rising Star nomination, a player must be under 21 years of age as at January 1 of that year, must not have played more than 10 games to the start of that season and must not have been suspended by the AFL or State League tribunals during the season."

here's the link:
http://www.afl.com.au/development/nabaf ... fault.aspx

Not interested in an apology.

[Dr Spaceman]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me.  

He wasnt but his charge attracted more than 100 points. It can work the other way though. The charge can be less than 100 points but you get a week but can still win the award.

Rubbish, if you get suspended you can't win and there is no mention of points.

You can apologize if you like. I doubt I will get one though.

Based on a decision by a separate Match Review Panel, players are levied a number of base demerit points, according to the severity of their offence;
 The panel then adjusts the number of base points to a number of final demerit points, via additions (for a poor prior tribunal record), or deductions (for a good prior tribunal record or for lodging an early guilty plea).
 Players are suspended for one match for every 100 final demerit points he has.
 
In terms of Brownlow Medal eligibility, a player becomes ineligible if he accrues more than 100 base points during the season; final points are irrelevant. This means that it is now possible for a player to be ineligible for the Brownlow Medal, despite not having served a suspension that season;[2] or, to be eligible for the Brownlow despite receiving a suspension.[3

I believe the Rising star has exactly the same criteria.

From the AFL website as referred to by saintbrat above:

"To qualify for the NAB AFL Rising Star nomination, a player must be under 21 years of age as at January 1 of that year, must not have played more than 10 games to the start of that season and must not have been suspended by the AFL or State League tribunals during the season."

here's the link: 
http://www.afl.com.au/development/nabaf ... fault.aspx

Not interested in an apology.

Thanks Bernard.

That should end this thread

[plugger66]

I thought Dustin Martin from Richmond couldn't win it last year but wasn't actually suspended? But I think my memory is playing tricks on me.

He wasnt but his charge attracted more than 100 points. It can work the other way though. The charge can be less than 100 points but you get a week but can still win the award.

Rubbish, if you get suspended you can't win and there is no mention of points.

You can apologize if you like. I doubt I will get one though.

Based on a decision by a separate Match Review Panel, players are levied a number of base demerit points, according to the severity of their offence;
The panel then adjusts the number of base points to a number of final demerit points, via additions (for a poor prior tribunal record), or deductions (for a good prior tribunal record or for lodging an early guilty plea).
Players are suspended for one match for every 100 final demerit points he has.

In terms of Brownlow Medal eligibility, a player becomes ineligible if he accrues more than 100 base points during the season; final points are irrelevant. This means that it is now possible for a player to be ineligible for the Brownlow Medal, despite not having served a suspension that season;[2] or, to be eligible for the Brownlow despite receiving a suspension.[3

I believe the Rising star has exactly the same criteria.

From the AFL website as referred to by saintbrat above:

"To qualify for the NAB AFL Rising Star nomination, a player must be under 21 years of age as at January 1 of that year, must not have played more than 10 games to the start of that season and must not have been suspended by the AFL or State League tribunals during the season."

here's the link:
http://www.afl.com.au/development/nabaf ... fault.aspx

Not interested in an apology.

Interesting that there is a note in the eligibility that says it is exactly the same as the Brownlow medal eligibility. BS did you miss that deliberately or accidentally. If deliberately an apology would be good otherwise I accept that you would have apologised anyway.

[saintspremiers]

Jack is eligible to win rising star award.

He's been nominated this year already hasn't he???

[Rosco]

he has been nominated. and he should be ranked highly in the media in terms of being a chance to win it, but it just won't happen.

regarding eligibility more broadly, are there any offences that you can be charged with that attract less than 100 points (ignoring any good behaviour / guilty plea discounts)?

if there are, and you commit two of them within one season (or game), you could total more than 100 and be suspended (and also become ineligible for the rising star / brownlow).

in the old days if you committed two offences in the one game, each of which wouldn't see you get suspended on their individual merits, you would get off scott free.

so you could argue that the new system means that those players that are often close to crossing the magical suspension line (but don't) are disadvantaged. dermie & rhys jones would have been screwed by carry over points back in the 80s.

[Griggsy]

I doubt he will win. Given that the media and the general public think Saints footy is boring and lacks excitement. Even though Steven burning defenders in the center square is some of the more exciting footy we have seen from St Kilda this year.