Play Nice Is Gil really this much of a fool? Jobe's Brownlow and the commission's "hard" decision.

[pablo668]

That's a really good question, but in this case, Gil has it covered.

View attachment 299125

What many don't know is that this was actually a strip-o-gram. They edited it out.

 

[Underarm]

The only opinion less popular than Donald trump becoming President should be that Jobe keeps his Brownlow.


Can't imagine Cotch or Sam Mitchell would want it though. Both seem embarrassed by the idea of looking like wanting it.

 

[Ghost of Punt Road]

Why should a clean athlete have to justify their worthiness over a convicted drug cheat?! Disgusting.

Bloody weird, isn't it? Your job is to make decisions. On drug cheats. Keeping winnings. Wow. Tough...um...Idunno.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I think I actually have a pretty reasonable solution for all parties.

1. Officially make Sam and Trent the winners of the 2012 Brownlow. Give them a proper ceremony and acknowledge it publicly.

2. Jobe is, in title, stripped of his Brownlow. However, he is allowed to keep the physical medal due to being a good bloke. He can show his grandkids and tell them his version of events, but officially he won't be acknowledged as the winner.

This does the right thing while being respectful of Jobe.

They can say giving someone a medal and taking it away is different to a suspended player (e.g. Grant) never physically receiving a medal at all. I'd accept this as an Essendon-friendly compromise.

I actually never even considered they'd physically take the medal back.

It's just a medal. I would think they just strip him of the award in the official records.

 

[Sprout]

I actually have a pretty reasonable solution.

1. Officially make Sam and Trent the winners of the 2012 Brownlow. Give them a proper ceremony and acknowledge it publicly.

2. Jobe is, in title, stripped of his Brownlow. However, he is allowed to keep the physical medal due to being a good bloke. He can show his grandkids and tell them his version of events, but officially he won't be acknowledged as the winner.

This does the right thing while being respectful of Jobe.

They can say it's different to a suspended player (e.g. Grant) who never physically receives a medal. I'd accept this as an Essendon-friendly compromise.

No offence but those are both horrendous ideas.

IF Mitchell and Cotchin are to be named the new winners (I personally think it should be left unawarded), they don't need a heap of fanfare associated with it. I doubt they themselves would want that. The whole thing would be off the scale awkward.

Why on earth would Watson want a medal for an award he didn't win? Talk about hollow. Looking at it would just be a reminder of an episode I'm sure he'd rather forget.

 

[Rance2Mewtwo]

The only opinion less popular than Donald trump becoming President should be that Jobe keeps his Brownlow.


Can't imagine Cotch or Sam Mitchell would want it though. Both seem embarrassed by the idea of looking like wanting it.

They'd be embarrassed knowing what the AFL and the media's narrative is on the issue and the requirement to play along in order to not ruffle any feathers and potentially cost themselves a Brownlow.

They need to play the game until they are perceived to be graciously and unwillingly forced to wear a Brownlow Medal around their necks.

In private, I'm sure they'd be very disappointed at the missed opportunities the EFC's conduct has cost them and they probably believe they're worthy winners. I know I would.

 

[underthestars]

It's an interesting one. What's the closest example? Melbourne Storm? Their premierships weren't re-awarded because (rightly) every club who were beaten by them that year had a claim to it, however small. What about the teams that lost the prelims to them?

If Watson obtained ALL of his votes unfairly, then surely every other guilty Essendon player did too. So aren't there players who played in games against a whole team of guilty players? Weren't they denied the chance at votes unfairly?

That's what makes these things tough and why they often aren't re-awarded.

No, the closest example is every other brownlow - where players have been suspended and thus ineligible, even if those players finish with the most votes. They don't worry about players that may otherwise have won votes. Just like in the Olympics they don't strip Johnson and not award Lewis due to the contingency that another runner was wrongfully eliminated in the heats and therefore the whole medal should be null and void,
The Brownlow - where the precedent of awarding retrospective medals to unlucky past losers has already been enacted.
There's nothing hard about this decision at all.

 

[Tiger2709]

But can you guys really stomach Cotchin being a brownlow winner? Seriously.

School holidays are over lad, Cotchin won the coaches vote that year, had a great season and deserved every vote he got, its not a career award its Fairest and Best for that season, the only thing hard to stomach would be a convicted drug cheat keeping it.

 

[frenchfri12]

Lol at the number of people who want the change the rules

change what rules? our players performance was being enhanced, how do you know that Thompson, Swan, Ablett or Dangerfield wouldn't of gotten 3 more votes playing against us and they would of won the medal?

 

[frenchfri12]

Cotchin won the coaches vote that year,

1. Mitchell won
2. Read my above post.

 

[The_Reaper]

He should have handed it back 1st thing this morning.

Last possible date for him to make the call and come out with any respect.

 

[Fraud Squad]

genuinely fraudulent, indeed.

 

[Ghost of Punt Road]

If it was in the right direction he would have said "no" to the entire "supplements" program in the first place.

Please don't bookmark that I agree with a Carlton supporter.

Jobe is NOT a top bloke. He did not question an off-site injection regime .

He did not question each injection.

He did not protect younger players who may have been intimidated.

He did not hand back his Brownlow. He is keeping it? What a ...Wayne Kerr.

 

[Magpie Monopoly]

Please cite precedent where a professional athlete was convicted on being a drug cheat and was allowed to keep any personal awards they won during said time of being a drug cheat. I advise you go take a look at many individual professional sports such as, i dunno, cycling and see how it works in the real world when you are caught being a drug cheat.

Oh, and the WADA findings stated the players knowingly were ignorant in the entire process, so can we avoid the "they didn't do anything wrong, it was Hird" crap please. It's not true. Enough

 

[The_Reaper]

East German athletes under a government run program in a totalitarian dictatorship - filthy cheats.

Jobe - naive and misled. Good bloke though

 

[Bunk Moreland]

No, the closest example is every other brownlow - where players have been suspended and thus ineligible, even if those players finish with the most votes. They don't worry about players that may otherwise have won votes. Just like in the Olympics they don't strip Johnson and not award Lewis due to the contingency that another runner was wrongfully eliminated in the heats and therefore the whole medal should be null and void,
The Brownlow - where the precedent of awarding retrospective medals to unlucky past losers has already been enacted.
There's nothing hard about this decision at all.

It's a completely different situation. The reason Jobe is being stripped of it affected every Essendon game that year. There are players who finished just behind Mitchell or Cotchin who played against Essendon.

 

[reload141]

School holidays are over lad, Cotchin won the coaches vote that year, had a great season and deserved every vote he got, its not a career award its Fairest and Best for that season, the only thing hard to stomach would be a convicted drug cheat keeping it.

Cute, using the school holidays as your argument.

 

[The_Reaper]

It's a completely different situation. The reason Jobe is being stripped of it affected every Essendon game that year. There are players who finished just behind Mitchell or Cotchin who played against Essendon.

I guess we should strike the Coleman medal as well.

Think it was Riewoldt so double lols about Richmond

 

[Underarm]

It's a completely different situation. The reason Jobe is being stripped of it affected every Essendon game that year. There are players who finished just behind Mitchell or Cotchin who played against Essendon.

Everyone played Chris Grant when he was suspended as well.
Mitchell and Cotchin played Essendon that year as well - twice if I remember correctly. Totally even playing field.

 

[2006_Eagles]

genuinely fraudulent, indeed.

Strong post to username corellation

 

[Fraud Squad]

Strong post to username corellation

No one likes an impostor.

 

[2006_Eagles]

No one likes an impostor.

Or a bogan

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Had Jobe had an ounce of integrity he should have handed it back having seen how the public reacted to Bevo and even recommended it go to the other two.

The public would have turned full circle.

 

[frenchfri12]

Everyone played Chris Grant when he was suspended as well.

He didn't play during his one week suspension. He also only got his suspension in round 8, before which he had scored 16 brownlow votes.

Mitchell and Cotchin played Essendon that year as well - twice if I remember correctly. Totally even playing field.

How? Who cares how many games they played? Not fair all. Cotchin probably had one of his VFL quality preformances the two times we played Richmond and wouldn't of scored any votes anyway.

 

[Fraud Squad]

Or a bogan

or a giblet.