Dumb question..........................?

[SaintPelican66]

Receiving a Brownlow these days is like winning the US Presidency, its a popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life.

Back on "AFL Conspiracies" Vortex??

Would really like you to explain exactly how your assertion "popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life" can be applied to the awarding of votes for the Brownlow by individual umpires, who are independent of the AFL Commission and clubs.

Vortex will not answer your valid question Sanctorum. He makes his stupid posts and does not back them up with any evidence.

[Vortex]

Receiving a Brownlow these days is like winning the US Presidency, its a popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life.

Back on "AFL Conspiracies" Vortex??

Would really like you to explain exactly how your assertion "popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life" can be applied to the awarding of votes for the Brownlow by individual umpires, who are independent of the AFL Commission and clubs.

Well you don't have to introduce too many examples of how "independent" the umpires are from the AFL to shoot down the "independent" argument...Barry Hall 2005 prelim anyone.

The umpires might be acting independently when they book a player or cast a vote on match day, but what happens after that is filtered through self serving commercial interests.

[spert]

Because our midfield ground to a halt and let North mids win the game for them?

[The_Dud]

The top 4 in the Brownlow were Neale, Boak, Petracca and Steele.

The top 4 in the coaches votes were Neale, Petracca, Boak and Steele.

Another Secret Vortex classic call!

Good to see those 4 players sucking up to the umps and coaches equally!

[SaintPelican66]

The top 4 in the Brownlow were Neale, Boak, Petracca and Steele.

The top 4 in the coaches votes were Neale, Petracca, Boak and Steele.

Another Secret Vortex classic call!

Good to see those 4 players sucking up to the umps and coaches equally!

No point being logical with Vortex the Enigma.

[WellardSaint]

I recall a game vs the Swine a year or two ago, when the Swans made sure to get the ball to Luke's direct opponent, because he could easily outrun Luke and did so several times.
Thus exposing our lack of pace

[Sanctorum]

Back on "AFL Conspiracies" Vortex??

Would really like you to explain exactly how your assertion "popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life" can be applied to the awarding of votes for the Brownlow by individual umpires, who are independent of the AFL Commission and clubs.

Well you don't have to introduce too many examples of how "independent" the umpires are from the AFL to shoot down the "independent" argument...Barry Hall 2005 prelim anyone.

The umpires might be acting independently when they book a player or cast a vote on match day, but what happens after that is filtered through self serving commercial interests.
[/quote]

You have failed to prove your assertion Vortex but having conceded that umpires act independently when they cast a vote on match day, how exactly can anyone, including the AFL, change these votes, (which I understand are locked away by the umpires under strict security until the night of the count), in any shape or form "through self serving commercial interests".

I can't think of any "commercial interests", other than maybe betting agencies, that would have a reason to want to interfere with the outcome of a Brownlow Medal count - can you? Given the numerous betting agencies out there fielding on the Brownlow, the chances of that are zero....

You regularly paint yourself into corners with wild and exaggerated assertions about all manner of subjects, but I've yet to see you validate any! Your credibility ratings on this forum are woeful, no wonder you change names so often!

[Vortex]

You have failed to prove your assertion Vortex but having conceded that umpires act independently when they cast a vote on match day, how exactly can anyone, including the AFL, change these votes, (which I understand are locked away by the umpires under strict security until the night of the count), in any shape or form "through self serving commercial interests".

I can't think of any "commercial interests", other than maybe betting agencies, that would have a reason to want to interfere with the outcome of a Brownlow Medal count - can you? Given the numerous betting agencies out there fielding on the Brownlow, the chances of that are zero....

You regularly paint yourself into corners with wild and exaggerated assertions about all manner of subjects, but I've yet to see you validate any! Your credibility ratings on this forum are woeful, no wonder you change names so often!

And you my friend debate with the same hysterical reasoning and logic that makes Donald Trump seem normal.

Tell me where I said the AFL tamper with votes in a sealed box that is guarded. After you apologise for your embarrassing outburst, then please read the plethora of material on the Barry Hall scandal from the 2005 GF week that saw the AFL assist the Swans to win the flag that year. Then tell me for what reason the AFL might have wanted the Swans to win the flag that year. Was it just because they felt sorry for the long suffering fans. FFS mate, pull your head out of your arse and engage in adult conversation.

[Sanctorum]

And you my friend debate with the same hysterical reasoning and logic that makes Donald Trump seem normal.

Tell me where I said the AFL tamper with votes in a sealed box that is guarded. After you apologise for your embarrassing outburst, then please read the plethora of material on the Barry Hall scandal from the 2005 GF week that saw the AFL assist the Swans to win the flag that year. Then tell me for what reason the AFL might have wanted the Swans to win the flag that year. Was it just because they felt sorry for the long suffering fans. FFS mate, pull your head out of your arse and engage in adult conversation.

There's no need to stoop to "argumentum ad hominem" Vortex.

All I asked was for you to explain your original statement:

"Receiving a Brownlow these days is like winning the US Presidency, its a popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life." which clearly implies that the whole process of the Brownlow is corrupt.

[The_Dud]

And you my friend debate with the same hysterical reasoning and logic that makes Donald Trump seem normal.

Tell me where I said the AFL tamper with votes in a sealed box that is guarded. After you apologise for your embarrassing outburst, then please read the plethora of material on the Barry Hall scandal from the 2005 GF week that saw the AFL assist the Swans to win the flag that year. Then tell me for what reason the AFL might have wanted the Swans to win the flag that year. Was it just because they felt sorry for the long suffering fans. FFS mate, pull your head out of your arse and engage in adult conversation.

There's no need to stoop to "argumentum ad hominem" Vortex.

All I asked was for you to explain your original statement:

"Receiving a Brownlow these days is like winning the US Presidency, its a popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life." which clearly implies that the whole process of the Brownlow is corrupt.

As stated above, Secret Vortex is an expert in avoiding the hard questions.

Just makes absurd claims with no evidence, then refuses to answer any clarifying questions.

Also, no amount of 'fails' (and there's quite a few!) will slow him down, which I suppose could be seen as an admirable quality! haha

[Vortex]

And you my friend debate with the same hysterical reasoning and logic that makes Donald Trump seem normal.

Tell me where I said the AFL tamper with votes in a sealed box that is guarded. After you apologise for your embarrassing outburst, then please read the plethora of material on the Barry Hall scandal from the 2005 GF week that saw the AFL assist the Swans to win the flag that year. Then tell me for what reason the AFL might have wanted the Swans to win the flag that year. Was it just because they felt sorry for the long suffering fans. FFS mate, pull your head out of your arse and engage in adult conversation.

There's no need to stoop to "argumentum ad hominem" Vortex.

All I asked was for you to explain your original statement:

"Receiving a Brownlow these days is like winning the US Presidency, its a popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life." which clearly implies that the whole process of the Brownlow is corrupt.

Don't over think it, clearly your mindset is a system that is pure and perfect. It has been heavily debated in the past that the Brownlow is a legacy award from a bygone era with many a flaw in the way the best are judged, the fairest bit I don't care for much and absolutely the umpires should contribute to adjudicating who is the fairest, and that is where the sucking up bit happens on the field. The player who has attitude and bad behavior doesn't get many gold stars but he might be the best. Doesn't that make it a popularity contest.

[saynta]

And you my friend debate with the same hysterical reasoning and logic that makes Donald Trump seem normal.

Tell me where I said the AFL tamper with votes in a sealed box that is guarded. After you apologise for your embarrassing outburst, then please read the plethora of material on the Barry Hall scandal from the 2005 GF week that saw the AFL assist the Swans to win the flag that year. Then tell me for what reason the AFL might have wanted the Swans to win the flag that year. Was it just because they felt sorry for the long suffering fans. FFS mate, pull your head out of your arse and engage in adult conversation.

There's no need to stoop to "argumentum ad hominem" Vortex.

All I asked was for you to explain your original statement:

"Receiving a Brownlow these days is like winning the US Presidency, its a popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life." which clearly implies that the whole process of the Brownlow is corrupt.

Don't over think it, clearly your mindset is a system that is pure and perfect. It has been heavily debated in the past that the Brownlow is a legacy award from a bygone era with many a flaw in the way the best are judged, the fairest bit I don't care for much and absolutely the umpires should contribute to adjudicating who is the fairest, and that is where the sucking up bit happens on the field. The player who has attitude and bad behavior doesn't get many gold stars but he might be the best. Doesn't that make it a popularity contest.

Except the coaches votes pretty much line up with the maggots votes.

[Vortex]

And you my friend debate with the same hysterical reasoning and logic that makes Donald Trump seem normal.

Tell me where I said the AFL tamper with votes in a sealed box that is guarded. After you apologise for your embarrassing outburst, then please read the plethora of material on the Barry Hall scandal from the 2005 GF week that saw the AFL assist the Swans to win the flag that year. Then tell me for what reason the AFL might have wanted the Swans to win the flag that year. Was it just because they felt sorry for the long suffering fans. FFS mate, pull your head out of your arse and engage in adult conversation.

There's no need to stoop to "argumentum ad hominem" Vortex.

All I asked was for you to explain your original statement:

"Receiving a Brownlow these days is like winning the US Presidency, its a popularity contest and all about who you are willing to suck up to in life." which clearly implies that the whole process of the Brownlow is corrupt.

Don't over think it, clearly your mindset is a system that is pure and perfect. It has been heavily debated in the past that the Brownlow is a legacy award from a bygone era with many a flaw in the way the best are judged, the fairest bit I don't care for much and absolutely the umpires should contribute to adjudicating who is the fairest, and that is where the sucking up bit happens on the field. The player who has attitude and bad behavior doesn't get many gold stars but he might be the best. Doesn't that make it a popularity contest.

Except the coaches votes pretty much line up with the maggots votes.

Midfielders...does that happen every year?

[Sanctorum]

Don't over think it, clearly your mindset is a system that is pure and perfect. It has been heavily debated in the past that the Brownlow is a legacy award from a bygone era with many a flaw in the way the best are judged, the fairest bit I don't care for much and absolutely the umpires should contribute to adjudicating who is the fairest, and that is where the sucking up bit happens on the field. The player who has attitude and bad behavior doesn't get many gold stars but he might be the best. Doesn't that make it a popularity contest.

Except the coaches votes pretty much line up with the maggots votes.
[/quote]

Midfielders...does that happen every year?
[/quote]

Obviously you are the one who is "overthinking" it by dismissing the fact that the Brownlow Medal is awarded to the player who is adjudged BOTH best AND fairest - the two go hand in hand, and always will.

"The player who has attitude and bad behavior (sic)" will never deserve votes from umpires who are obliged to follow the original criteria established by Charles Brownlow.

In an earlier response you accused me of an "embarrassing outburst" and "hysterical reasoning and logic" and demand I apologise. In reality it is you who are embarrassing yourself as you have completely failed to prove your following claim:

The umpires might be acting independently when they book a player or cast a vote on match day, but what happens after that is filtered through self serving commercial interests.

Exactly WHAT happens to the umpires' votes "after that"???

[saynta]

It's actually Fairest and best, not best and fairest.

[Vortex]

Don't over think it, clearly your mindset is a system that is pure and perfect. It has been heavily debated in the past that the Brownlow is a legacy award from a bygone era with many a flaw in the way the best are judged, the fairest bit I don't care for much and absolutely the umpires should contribute to adjudicating who is the fairest, and that is where the sucking up bit happens on the field. The player who has attitude and bad behavior doesn't get many gold stars but he might be the best. Doesn't that make it a popularity contest.

Except the coaches votes pretty much line up with the maggots votes.

Midfielders...does that happen every year?
[/quote]

Obviously you are the one who is "overthinking" it by dismissing the fact that the Brownlow Medal is awarded to the player who is adjudged BOTH best AND fairest - the two go hand in hand, and always will.

"The player who has attitude and bad behavior (sic)" will never deserve votes from umpires who are obliged to follow the original criteria established by Charles Brownlow.

In an earlier response you accused me of an "embarrassing outburst" and "hysterical reasoning and logic" and demand I apologise. In reality it is you who are embarrassing yourself as you have completely failed to prove your following claim:

The umpires might be acting independently when they book a player or cast a vote on match day, but what happens after that is filtered through self serving commercial interests.

Exactly WHAT happens to the umpires' votes "after that"???
[/quote]

You are carrying on a bit, a lot actually.

What did you think of the Barry Hall scandal in 2005? Barry has since admitted the AFL interfered with the system to allow him to play when clearly he shouldn't have. Was that not self serving by the AFL?

[saynta]

Give it a rest ffs.

[Sanctorum]

You are carrying on a bit, a lot actually.

What did you think of the Barry Hall scandal in 2005? Barry has since admitted the AFL interfered with the system to allow him to play when clearly he shouldn't have. Was that not self serving by the AFL?

Just trying to bring you to account to validate your absurd claim the Brownlow Medal process is somehow distorted by the AFL pandering to commercial interests, instead you try to muddy the waters by steering the argument in other directions.

In the context of this discussion it is immaterial what I think of the "Barry Hall scandal" but quite obviously he should never have been cleared of the blatant king hit on Goose.

By the way, what is your source for stating "Barry has since admitted the AFL interfered with the system to allow him to play"??

[SaintPelican66]

Don't over think it, clearly your mindset is a system that is pure and perfect. It has been heavily debated in the past that the Brownlow is a legacy award from a bygone era with many a flaw in the way the best are judged, the fairest bit I don't care for much and absolutely the umpires should contribute to adjudicating who is the fairest, and that is where the sucking up bit happens on the field. The player who has attitude and bad behavior doesn't get many gold stars but he might be the best. Doesn't that make it a popularity contest.

Except the coaches votes pretty much line up with the maggots votes.

Midfielders...does that happen every year?

Obviously you are the one who is "overthinking" it by dismissing the fact that the Brownlow Medal is awarded to the player who is adjudged BOTH best AND fairest - the two go hand in hand, and always will.

"The player who has attitude and bad behavior (sic)" will never deserve votes from umpires who are obliged to follow the original criteria established by Charles Brownlow.

In an earlier response you accused me of an "embarrassing outburst" and "hysterical reasoning and logic" and demand I apologise. In reality it is you who are embarrassing yourself as you have completely failed to prove your following claim:

The umpires might be acting independently when they book a player or cast a vote on match day, but what happens after that is filtered through self serving commercial interests.

Exactly WHAT happens to the umpires' votes "after that"???
[/quote]

You are carrying on a bit, a lot actually.

What did you think of the Barry Hall scandal in 2005? Barry has since admitted the AFL interfered with the system to allow him to play when clearly he shouldn't have. Was that not self serving by the AFL?
[/quote]

What the AFL did with Barry Hall / Matt McGuire was a disgrace. BUT THAT HAD f*** ALL TO DO WITH THE BROWNLOW.

Vortex, you remind me of a drunken derelict who just keeps blabering to himself knowing full well no one else has any f****** idea what he is saying.

[realdeal]

If Luke Dunstan played well enough in round 1 to earn 1 Brownlow vote then why was he dropped for the next game? Before you have a go at me saynta, this is an honest question.

I think that Ratts decided that he wanted to go for more pace in the team. And over the year being quicker than our opponents worked very well for us.

But personally like the umps I thought that against North that he was one of our best players and was very stiff to not be selected.

Being injured for 8 weeks didnt help, I reckon he would've come back into the team at some point if not for the injury. By the time he recovered it was just too late in the season..

[Cordz2]

Because umpires notice midfielders who get the ball not how they use it or how they adhere to team structures.

Well said

[Vortex]

You are carrying on a bit, a lot actually.

What did you think of the Barry Hall scandal in 2005? Barry has since admitted the AFL interfered with the system to allow him to play when clearly he shouldn't have. Was that not self serving by the AFL?

Just trying to bring you to account to validate your absurd claim the Brownlow Medal process is somehow distorted by the AFL pandering to commercial interests, instead you try to muddy the waters by steering the argument in other directions.

In the context of this discussion it is immaterial what I think of the "Barry Hall scandal" but quite obviously he should never have been cleared of the blatant king hit on Goose.

By the way, what is your source for stating "Barry has since admitted the AFL interfered with the system to allow him to play"??

You claimed the umpires are independent of the AFL in response to me claiming the Brownlow is a brown-nose award for the fairest player. As usual you go nuts half cocked without comprehending.

But while we are chewing the fat, I'll add this, a system that disqualifies the "actual" best player from winning an award that values the fairest player above being the "best" player is not only a conflicted judging criteria, it is proof the award doesn't value who is necessarily the best. Moreover, umpires are unconsciously biased because the award is predominantly awarded to midfielders for obvious reasons. As I say, it's a legacy award from a bygone era that is more about the commercial benifts and razzmatazz for WAGs and other self interests.

If the AFL was fair dinkum about finding who is the fairest and who is the best then they would separate the awards and develop a more objective way of judging the best. Clearly the system of umpires being used to judge the fairest would still be applicable.

I also gave you an example of how the umpires are not independent.

The umpires work within the system and rules set down by the AFL. Umpires and the AFL as a system can manipulate an outcome based on an agenda. Compare the Barry hall case of 2005 and the Houli case in 2017 where the AFL intervened after the tribunal.

And don't get me started how the umpires and AFL have a long history of having a different system for H&A and finals...

independent my fat hairy arse.

[asiu]

that would be ... blabbering

blabering sounds like something someone like you
would do to himself in the privacy of his own home

spelling , like manners , matter

[asiu]

re the Bustling Barry incident

the Coach had kids at the same school as mine
it was an awards night
i was sneaking in a quick durry
being a shadow in the garden

and then , there was the Coach ,
discussing getting Big Bad Bustling Barry
a free pass to play



he did start backwards
when he twigged me

walked inside with a big grin on my face
after saying ... good onya

(with the perfectly weighted dash of righteousness ‘n contempt)

but i was grinning
coz he got caught

not because of what he was up to

[Sanctorum]

You claimed the umpires are independent of the AFL in response to me claiming the Brownlow is a brown-nose award for the fairest player. As usual you go nuts half cocked without comprehending.

But while we are chewing the fat, I'll add this, a system that disqualifies the "actual" best player from winning an award that values the fairest player above being the "best" player is not only a conflicted judging criteria, it is proof the award doesn't value who is necessarily the best. Moreover, umpires are unconsciously biased because the award is predominantly awarded to midfielders for obvious reasons. As I say, it's a legacy award from a bygone era that is more about the commercial benifts and razzmatazz for WAGs and other self interests.

If the AFL was fair dinkum about finding who is the fairest and who is the best then they would separate the awards and develop a more objective way of judging the best. Clearly the system of umpires being used to judge the fairest would still be applicable.

I also gave you an example of how the umpires are not independent.

The umpires work within the system and rules set down by the AFL. Umpires and the AFL as a system can manipulate an outcome based on an agenda. Compare the Barry hall case of 2005 and the Houli case in 2017 where the AFL intervened after the tribunal.

And don't get me started how the umpires and AFL have a long history of having a different system for H&A and finals...

independent my fat hairy arse.

You accuse me of "carrying on a lot" Vortex - maybe so but I feel compelled to bring you to account for your outrageous claims about AFL conspiracies and biased umpiring.

You blithely ignore my request for evidential proof of Barry Hall stating that the AFL had a hand in his acquittal, so in other words acting corruptly, and then go on to a long rant about your suspicions.

Seems to me you're suffering from a severe bout of jaundice (in your case probably brought on by s*** on liver) - it can be treated you know and once cured you'll feel a lot better about things....