No Oppo Supporters General AFL discussion and other club news

Remove this Banner Ad

So what’s the tipping on the Heeney appeal tonight?
I’m thinking he’ll get off, Dilligan has no doubt had a word in the right ear.
But it's AFL chook lotto, so who knows. Would be a travesty if he went for that though, I think the fact Heeney drew blood made it look worse than it was. To be denied a potential Chas for that would be criminal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So what’s the tipping on the Heeney appeal tonight?
I’m thinking he’ll get off, Dilligan has no doubt had a word in the right ear.
But it's AFL chook lotto, so who knows. Would be a travesty if he went for that though, I think the fact Heeney drew blood made it look worse than it was. To be denied a potential Chas for that would be criminal.

It would never have got this far if there was some conspiracy to get him off.
 
So what’s the tipping on the Heeney appeal tonight?
I’m thinking he’ll get off, Dilligan has no doubt had a word in the right ear.
But it's AFL chook lotto, so who knows. Would be a travesty if he went for that though, I think the fact Heeney drew blood made it look worse than it was. To be denied a potential Chas for that would be criminal.
When I first saw the footage I had to rewatch it twice more as I couldn’t even tell what the contact was meant to be.

The blood nose would have to be what has got it looked at because there have been way worse this year that only got fines. Hogan for example.
 
So what’s the tipping on the Heeney appeal tonight?
I’m thinking he’ll get off, Dilligan has no doubt had a word in the right ear.
But it's AFL chook lotto, so who knows. Would be a travesty if he went for that though, I think the fact Heeney drew blood made it look worse than it was. To be denied a potential Chas for that would be criminal.
I quite agree that he should not have been suspended for that. However, he has been found guilty - twice. The AFL must be consistent. Overturning the decision now just smacks of incompetence. It is not as if there is any new mitigating evidence.
 
I quite agree that he should not have been suspended for that. However, he has been found guilty - twice. The AFL must be consistent. Overturning the decision now just smacks of incompetence. It is not as if there is any new mitigating evidence.
The AFL and consistency? Yeah nah.
I’m neither here nor there when it comes to Heeney but I find it laughable the lengths they go to support the original decision, which to me was simply wrong. Then you think about the Charlie Cameron good bloke defence, which wasn’t allowed here, and you shouldn’t wonder why the average punter is confused by the whole process.
 
My god - you would think that he had a career ending injury - ITS ONE WEEK


Honestly can’t believe he has copped a week for it, but also it’s been painfully obvious despite their claims to the contrary that Sydney were only trying so hard because of the Brownlow medal.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)



Every time a player is suspended the media cohort starts questioning whether the rules should be changed for Brownlow eligibility.

I don't know why they keep talking about it. This is what the Brownlow is. Just stop releasing the coaches votes every week and save it for a ceremony, at least that way you've got the people who actually know which players had an impact and a more valuable award. Always hated how much value was put on an umpire voted award with such a shameful history of players being screwed over or in Geoff Raines' case completely ignored.
 


Every time a player is suspended the media cohort starts questioning whether the rules should be changed for Brownlow eligibility.

I don't know why they keep talking about it. This is what the Brownlow is. Just stop releasing the coaches votes every week and save it for a ceremony, at least that way you've got the people who actually know which players had an impact and a more valuable award. Always hated how much value was put on an umpire voted award with such a shameful history of players being screwed over or in Geoff Raines' case completely ignored.

I think it's really cringe that the media is heading this way.
The BnF has always been the best and fairest. Calls to change that are ridiculous and should continue to be shot down by the AFL.
 
I think it's really cringe that the media is heading this way.
The BnF has always been the best and fairest. Calls to change that are ridiculous and should continue to be shot down by the AFL.
Give a vote penalty. Eg 1 match 1 vote, 2 matches 3 votes, 3 matches 6 votes....

Still keeps the fairest aspect and emphasis on best
 


Every time a player is suspended the media cohort starts questioning whether the rules should be changed for Brownlow eligibility.

I don't know why they keep talking about it. This is what the Brownlow is. Just stop releasing the coaches votes every week and save it for a ceremony, at least that way you've got the people who actually know which players had an impact and a more valuable award. Always hated how much value was put on an umpire voted award with such a shameful history of players being screwed over or in Geoff Raines' case completely ignored.

I reckon the eligibility should be based on intentional gradings only. And that's intentional in terms of performing an illegal action like striking, kicking, tripping, spitting, etc. Not "football actions" like tackles and trying to push away from an opponent who is holding on to you.
 
I think it's really cringe that the media is heading this way.
The BnF has always been the best and fairest. Calls to change that are ridiculous and should continue to be shot down by the AFL.
They just jump to the opposite of whatever the situation is leaning too. He'd bemoan the loss of tradition if the AFL came and changed it.
 
I reckon the eligibility should be based on intentional gradings only. And that's intentional in terms of performing an illegal action like striking, kicking, tripping, spitting, etc. Not "football actions" like tackles and trying to push away from an opponent who is holding on to you.
That requires too much faith in grading and has too much room for interpretation on what is a football action. As much as it seems unfair, a suspension is a suspension.
 
The Brownlow Medal is always referred to being awarded to the FAIREST and best player in the competition that year. The word FAIREST is the first word used. Media flogs need to shut the **** up about eligibility - if you haven't played fairly throughout the year then you don't win it. Spare me the sob stories.
 

No Oppo Supporters General AFL discussion and other club news

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top