I was commenting that Wjs post is a truer version of the events leading to Judds choice of Carlton . you're just a bit challenged obviously

Dog+Bone> you

give it a rest Billy .. Or are you working on vol 3

Actually, I'm beginning to think you're the challenged one. I was giving you an "out" for your comments about how there is a loophole in the AFL's system regarding finals and Brownlow eligibility. If you had've said that you were annoyed with the man himself, then I could understand your frustration with him winning the Brownlow.

The fact remains that according to the rules, C Judd was eligible to win the 2010 Brownlow Medal, he did win it, yet you are saying he should've been ineligible. What part of that is difficult for you to understand? And you think I'm challenged??!! From what I have seen/heard, you're the only one in Australia that has brought up this topic (plenty have brought up the Pav incident). There are a lot of experts out there who are in the media spotlight, and not one of them (to my knowledge) have supported your arguement - is that telling you something?

Also, to help end your concerns of a Judd-crush from my side, while I did say in an earlier post that he deserved it, I did also comment that there were a number of players who probably deserved it. Pre-Brownlow I was asked who would win, I said that I think Swan will win, hoped Luke Hodge (my actual man-crush!) would win, and thought Sandilands and Goddard would be a good place bet. TBH, I laughted at Judd's AA selection, so I think it's time you took your own advice and "gave it a rest", challenged one.

The bit you're missing Billy is in my opinion those rules are flawed.. Simple as that as all games incuuring a penalty of suspension don't all carry Brownlow inelligibilty. Argue what you like but that's the reality.

The bit you're missing Billy is in my opinion those rules are flawed.. Simple as that as all games incuuring a penalty of suspension don't all carry Brownlow inelligibilty. Argue what you like but that's the reality.

You are entitled to an opinion about this rule, but thought you would be thankful that there is still the odd rule that the AFL haven't changed. Because it has taken you until 2010 to bring it up makes you (in my opinion and a fewe others that have posted regarding it) sound very bitter about the winner.

Obviously you will say he doesn't deserve it, but it will be interesting to see reactions from other Melbourne supporters should Scully win the Brownlow after serving a suspension from the previous years finals series. I for one wont be saying that he doesn't deserve it. Scully is an angel though, so he probably wont get suspended EVER!

Edited September 22, 201014 yr by billy2803

Firstly I'm unsure if this scenario...

has occured before I.e player suspended from a final winning the season after ( and in which penalty to be served) Just becUse it surfaces now ought not detract from it's legitimacy. Should it ?

Secondly the farcial attempted history revisions have no input to my view of Judds win. Iwould be questioning it whomever won if under this circumstance ... Even your Scully scenario.

There is still no escaping the fact thT there are games that carry no Brownlow penalty and I'm sure thTs not really the spirit of the accolade.

I disagree with Judd winning the brownlow for a few reasons:

- he should have been suspended for his hit on Pavlich.

- he was not the best player this season, by a fair margin.

- he won votes in a contentious manner, clearly as a result of his teammates being so sub-par that he stood out amongst the pack; not necessarily because he was the best.

Now, the biggest problem is that this award is judged by the people least qualified to judge it - the umpires.

But you need to accept that, because it won't change. Maybe the solution is changing your perspective and placing less importance on the brownlow and more on the coaches' MVP and the players' MVP awards.

Whether he was suspended this year or last year is not in question. He was suspended last year.

Those rules do need to be looked at though - as it stands he was not ineligible for either the 2009 or 2010 brownlow.

Swan was the best player over the course pf the season, by a comfortable margin.

The problem is that we expect the umpires to be able to notice this whilst they are concentrating on enforcing the rules of the game instead (another issue entirely).

From my understanding they give the votes immediately before leaving the ground, after a quick glance at the stats.

Firstly I'm unsure if this scenario...

has occured before I.e player suspended from a final winning the season after ( and in which penalty to be served) Just becUse it surfaces now ought not detract from it's legitimacy. Should it ?

Secondly the farcial attempted history revisions have no input to my view of Judds win. Iwould be questioning it whomever won if under this circumstance ... Even your Scully scenario.

There is still no escaping the fact thT there are games that carry no Brownlow penalty and I'm sure thTs not really the spirit of the accolade.

Ok, in closing, your point is invalid, but...if they start giving Brownlow votes for games played in the finals series, then I will front the AFL and submit your arguement.

Until then, I will continue to respect the Brownlow Medal in its current format, that being the award for the Best and Fairest throughout the home and away season, a format that has stood the times and obsession of rule changes by the AFL.

Good bye.

Firstly I'm unsure if this scenario...

has occured before I.e player suspended from a final winning the season after ( and in which penalty to be served) Just becUse it surfaces now ought not detract from it's legitimacy. Should it ?

Secondly the farcial attempted history revisions have no input to my view of Judds win. Iwould be questioning it whomever won if under this circumstance ... Even your Scully scenario.

There is still no escaping the fact thT there are games that carry no Brownlow penalty and I'm sure thTs not really the spirit of the accolade.

Okay, hopefully one last comment from my behalf.

The spirit of the accolade is the fairest and best player during the home and away season. Finals = different season essentially. Simple.

Okay, hopefully one last comment from my behalf.

The spirit of the accolade is the fairest and best player during the home and away season. Finals = different season essentially. Simple.

Well said. Could sum up that poster quite easily.

E25 - love your comment "he won votes in a contentious manner, clearly as a result of his teammates being so sub-par that he stood out amongst the pack; not necessarily because he was the best." Up there with your best of the year!

ie. He may have been the best amongst his teammates, but was not necessarily the best on the field.

For example, polling 3 votes in a game where his team was smashed, or getting 2 votes when McPhee owned him against Freo.

Edited September 22, 201014 yr by E25

I hope nothing I've written above is interpreted as being against Chris Judd winning the Brownlow. He polled 30 votes and that's enough by me to make him a worthy winner, especially given that he missed the first three games of the season. He lucked out with the match review panel but that's part of the fascinating game of roulette that the AFL judicial system has become. In fact, most things about AFL decisions are random so why not when it comes down to whether a player should be suspended. The fact remains that Judd's a champion player and we shouldn't forget that even if we don't like what he or his management did to get him to Carlton.

By the same token, as much as I hate Collingwood, I have enough respect for what they've done this year not to be churlish about them this week and I wouldn't begrudge them the flag if they were to win on Saturday in Round 26. We can all laugh about Eddie's demeanour on seeing Dane Swan miss out on the Brownlow but at least his team is in the big one and deservedly so.

That said, I will still be barracking hard for the Saints right through to the final siren.

I hope nothing I've written above is interpreted as being against Chris Judd winning the Brownlow. He polled 30 votes and that's enough by me to make him a worthy winner, especially given that he missed the first three games of the season. He lucked out with the match review panel but that's part of the fascinating game of roulette that the AFL judicial system has become. In fact, most things about AFL decisions are random so why not when it comes down to whether a player should be suspended. The fact remains that Judd's a champion player and we shouldn't forget that even if we don't like what he or his management did to get him to Carlton.

By the same token, as much as I hate Collingwood, I have enough respect for what they've done this year not to be churlish about them this week and I wouldn't begrudge them the flag if they were to win on Saturday in Round 26. We can all laugh about Eddie's demeanour on seeing Dane Swan miss out on the Brownlow but at least his team is in the big one and deservedly so.

That said, I will still be barracking hard for the Saints right through to the final siren.

here, here

Those rules do need to be looked at though - as it stands he was not ineligible for either the 2009 or 2010 brownlow.

what a curious point

I disagree with Judd winning the brownlow for a few reasons:

- he should have been suspended for his hit on Pavlich.

- he was not the best player this season, by a fair margin.

- he won votes in a contentious manner, clearly as a result of his teammates being so sub-par that he stood out amongst the pack; not necessarily because he was the best.

30 votes for me is enough to say Judd is a worthy winner of the Brownlow. Blitzed 'em.

*I've argued this at O'logy re: Pavlich. He beat the system, good luck to him. Vent your anger at the MRP. Fwiw, I reckon it was a fairy tap on the sweet spot which resulted in the cut. Don't make me explain the force of a 'fairy tap', I think you would get the gist E25. Others probably don't.

*Most years the Brownlow winner might not be the best player of the season. MVP and Brownlow winners differ most years. I think Judd's season was very consistent and very very good. Most would have queried his season given he missed the first three. Agree with your last point. More often than not though he was Carlton's best player. Their B&F should support this.

Now, the biggest problem is that this award is judged by the people least qualified to judge it - the umpires.

But you need to accept that, because it won't change. Maybe the solution is changing your perspective and placing less importance on the brownlow and more on the coaches' MVP and the players' MVP awards.

Whether he was suspended this year or last year is not in question. He was suspended last year.

Those rules do need to be looked at though - as it stands he was not ineligible for either the 2009 or 2010 brownlow.

Swan was the best player over the course pf the season, by a comfortable margin.

The problem is that we expect the umpires to be able to notice this whilst they are concentrating on enforcing the rules of the game instead (another issue entirely).

From my understanding they give the votes immediately before leaving the ground, after a quick glance at the stats.

As highlighted, that is something that might need looking at.

It is a unique award and it is left to some people who make many mistakes during a game, let alone overlooking the game at the conclusion and giving the votes.

I hope nothing I've written above is interpreted as being against Chris Judd winning the Brownlow. He polled 30 votes and that's enough by me to make him a worthy winner, especially given that he missed the first three games of the season. He lucked out with the match review panel but that's part of the fascinating game of roulette that the AFL judicial system has become. In fact, most things about AFL decisions are random so why not when it comes down to whether a player should be suspended. The fact remains that Judd's a champion player and we shouldn't forget that even if we don't like what he or his management did to get him to Carlton.

By the same token, as much as I hate Collingwood, I have enough respect for what they've done this year not to be churlish about them this week and I wouldn't begrudge them the flag if they were to win on Saturday in Round 26. We can all laugh about Eddie's demeanour on seeing Dane Swan miss out on the Brownlow but at least his team is in the big one and deservedly so.

That said, I will still be barracking hard for the Saints right through to the final siren.

Good post. Agree with all of it. I'll add the margin though. Saints by 1 point.

Whether he was suspended this year or last year is not in question. He was suspended last year.

Those rules do need to be looked at though - as it stands he was not ineligible for either the 2009 or 2010 brownlow.

Why? He was suspended for an offence committed in a finals game. Not a home and away game. So there's no reason at all why he should have been ineligible for the 2009 Brownlow. As for the 2010, again, he didn't commit any offense in the 2010 home and away season. Sitting out matches for a suspension from the previous year is akin to missing games through injury.

Fair effort after missing the first three games through suspension but he lost me when he said he supported Melbourne as a kid. Wish he didn't say that.

Otherwise, it's a bit of an indictment on Carlton's recruiting. Where's their future if they're so dominated by one player?

I firmly believe we could overtake them on the ladder next year.If not I am sure we will be a far better team than them over the next decade.

Congrats to Judd. He is a great player in an average team. Not surprising he hogged the majority of Carlton votes. Why others at Carlton didn't get many votes I"m not sure. Perhaps because they are all ugly. My wife says Carlton is the ugliest looking team in the comp. Agree the Pavlich incident was only a "love tap". Nothing much in it and more accidental IMO.

I found his speech very interesting. Very reflective and had little to say about Carlton in general and vague as to why he joined them. The way he spoke about Melb, Stynes and Lyon I got the impression that there was a touch of regret in his voice. I suspect deep inside he may be rueing his decision to play with Carlton. Though it would have been a tough and perhaps unwise decision for him to come to Melb at that time.

Edited September 22, 201014 yr by america de cali

Why? He was suspended for an offence committed in a finals game. Not a home and away game. So there's no reason at all why he should have been ineligible for the 2009 Brownlow. As for the 2010, again, he didn't commit any offense in the 2010 home and away season. Sitting out matches for a suspension from the previous year is akin to missing games through injury.

If that's your conclusion, fine and well.

I came to the same conclusion.

But the rules still should be scrutinised.

30 votes for me is enough to say Judd is a worthy winner of the Brownlow. Blitzed 'em.

*I've argued this at O'logy re: Pavlich. He beat the system, good luck to him. Vent your anger at the MRP. Fwiw, I reckon it was a fairy tap on the sweet spot which resulted in the cut. Don't make me explain the force of a 'fairy tap', I think you would get the gist E25. Others probably don't.

*Most years the Brownlow winner might not be the best player of the season. MVP and Brownlow winners differ most years. I think Judd's season was very consistent and very very good. Most would have queried his season given he missed the first three. Agree with your last point. More often than not though he was Carlton's best player. Their B&F should support this.

I thought he still deserved to be suspended for it. Either this head is sacrosanct, or it isn't.

But yes, I get what you're saying HT.

This is where I think the issue also lies - people have false expectations of the award, or fail to accept the true nature of it. It's an award judged by the umpires and is bound to be riddled with anomalies.

As highlighted, that is something that might need looking at.

It is a unique award and it is left to some people who make many mistakes during a game, let alone overlooking the game at the conclusion and giving the votes.

I think as it stands is fair and reasonable, as titan said.

And yes, the umpires are not in the best position to be judging the award, but that is tradition.

Good post. Agree with all of it. I'll add the margin though. Saints by 1 point.

Collingwood by 26 points (god, i hope not).

What I don't follow is that in among so much hate for Collingwood, there's so much love for Carlton on this thread.

Carlton player doesn't have to be best player in the AFL to win Brownlow! Let's celebrate!

Carlton player beats the MRP rap when just about every other player in the AFL would be looking at 3 weeks! You beauty!

Am I alone in hating Carlton more than Collingwood? What annoys me more than anything about Judd's win is that Carlton are never on the receiving end of this sort of thing - they're never in the Dane Swan position - they're always the one being favoured by good fortune. No wonder they believe that they deserve special treatment.

I'm fine about Judd. But Carlton sit me to tears. They need taking down, not boosting up.

Am I alone in hating Carlton more than Collingwood?

Absolutely not.

There is no greater evil in the AFL than Carlton, and not enough words in the dictionary to sufficiently convey how much I loath and despise that club. Collingwood are bad, as are St Kilda and Hawthorn, but Carlton take the cake when it comes to cheating, filthy, arrogant scumbags. Nothing will bring me greater pleasure than to smash them in a Grand Final.

. . .

Am I alone in hating Carlton more than Collingwood? What annoys me more than anything about Judd's win is that Carlton are never on the receiving end of this sort of thing - they're never in the Dane Swan position - they're always the one being favoured by good fortune. No wonder they believe that they deserve special treatment.

I wouldn't call having Fevola "good fortune"

but, I think if you go through past threads you'll find plenty of hate for Carlton - they certainly deserve plenty

What I don't follow is that in among so much hate for Collingwood, there's so much love for Carlton on this thread.

Carlton player doesn't have to be best player in the AFL to win Brownlow! Let's celebrate!

Am I alone in hating Carlton more than Collingwood? What annoys me more than anything about Judd's win is that Carlton are never on the receiving end of this sort of thing - they're never in the Dane Swan position - they're always the one being favoured by good fortune. No wonder they believe that they deserve special treatment.

I hate Collingwood more than I hate Carlton, but I love to hate Collingwood, whereas Carlton just genuinely disgust me.

There's no sweeter feeling than beating Collingwood. I love seeing them fail, and I love seeing their supporters talk up their prospects only to fall short every year. By the same token, I don't bare their supporters any genuine ill-will, except while a games being played. It's fun to propogate the myth that they're are a bunch of toothless welfare dependants, but obviously it has as much basis in reality as the idea that we're all sheltered, blue-ribbon private school toffs. As a club, I think they've gotten where they are due to foresight and astute management; more than any other club they have adapted brilliantly to the professionalisation and nationisation of the game. The way they've authoratively stamped their brand as the definitive "working class side" while simultaneously turning themselves into a ruthlessly efficient corporate machine is practically zen. They havn't really taken short-cuts, not moreso than any other club anyway, they've just done it better. If Collingwood folded tomorrow I would miss them, because they provide me with a Yin to Melbourne's Yang. I'd miss the banter with Collingwood supporters, I'd miss beating them on QB, I'd miss seeing their supporters cry when they get to another Prelim or Grand Final only to lose yet again, and I'd even miss the little moments like the other night, seeing Eddie McGuire's face when one of his boys got "boned" out of a Brownlow. I don't hate them for any practical reason; it's just that they're Collingwood, and hating Collingwood is in the bones.

I find Carlton to be rotten to the core. While it's ridiculous to seriously make blanket statements about a club's supporters, nearly every time I've been to a game against Carlton their supporters have done something to leave a bad taste in my mouth; cheering when opposition players get injured, racist jibes at players, that sort of thing, in a way that goes beyond banter and becomes genuinely malicious. Again, I'm sure this is just my experience, and there'll be plenty here who've been to 50 games against Carlton and rarely had a problem. Still, while I know it's the actions of a handful of d'heads and doesnt represent Carlton fans as a whole, it has definitely left me predisposed to hate them as a club. Theres also the fact that they've cheated, stolen, and bought their way to success; to some extent Collingwood did this too, but Carlton continue to engage in the same sort of arrogant, born-to-rule behavior and continue to go unpunished for it. While Collingwood have increasingly expanded their brand as a prosperous club for battlers to support, I've always found Carlton to have no real identity; they basically are just a corrupt club built by white-collar crims who try to buy success at every turn, that's what defines them now (it might have been different prior to national expansion and the inner suburbs' gentrification, but I was a bit young to know). If they folded, I'd feel bad for the people I know who support them, but I wouldn't miss their presence in the competition. They are literally the only Victorian club I would say that about.

Um, yeah, that turned out to be a bit of a rant. As far as the Brownlow thing goes, and why I was able to enjoy it: first and foremost, I love seeing Collingwood fail. Secondly, Judd's victory is not exactly a ringing endorsement for Carlton, as it would have been for Collingwood. "Pendlebury factor" notwithstanding, they had a guy who, on paper, was the best player of the year, and have still only just scraped into the 8, six years after the start of their rebuild. They should be further along than they are.

^ If I could have sex with a post then I'd be taking the knickers off that one right now. Well said.

^ If I could have sex with a post then I'd be taking the knickers off that one right now. Well said.

Hahahahaha

Not only is that funny, but well summed up.

Good post 2 sheds.

Judd is a class act both on and off the field. He enriches our game. He is a credit to himself, his club and the AFL. He is an outstanding character and footballer who I have had the privilege of getting to know on a personal level. His reasons for choosing Carlton over Melbourne was only a result of 2007 being the start of the great Melbourne rebuild rather than the end (like Carlton). If he had of come to the Dees we would not have the list we have now and still be as far away from a premiership as we have ever been. He did not go to Carlton for the money. In the end there was very little monetary difference between the Melbourne and Carlton offers and associated offer (Melbourne had a Visy lined up as well). Juddy once told me that he left the meeting with Stynes and Lyon rang up Bec and said "I am going to Melbourne". Some time after this reality set in. He wants to win a Premiership and mark my words if Juddy had come to Melbourne at the end of 2007 he and the MFC would not have any chance of winning a premiership in his career. Give credit to the guy for doing the right thing by us and himself.

I have watched a couple Melbourne games with Juddy and I can report he still has a soft spot for our team. (No he will never play for us.) He was speaking highly of Frawley in 2008 before most on this site could see the talent. He was no fan of Robo (dropped to the ground too much, no defensive pressure), but rates Trengrove the highest of all our young guns. He thinks Melbourne is now a potential premiership list but warns me that it is going to take much longer than we would like to think.

Those who are paying Juddy out should stop. It sounds like sour grapes. You are discrediting yourselves.

Congratulations on a well deserved second Brownlow Juddy!

class act on and off the field? does that include eye gouging.