Judd's Brownlow - Evidence of fixing in AFL?

[Juddys_navy_blues]

What is this shit? Seriously? I love the Brownlow. It is a great event conducted in good spirits and always holds a sense of intrigue and interest for the spectator and becomes an honour for the winner. FWIW I thought Judd's year was outstanding. He was penalised for that stupid incident last year and he responded in the best possible way - playing top-bracket footy and stamping himself as one of the greats - see his 3rd quarter against the Swans for evidence. Give it up.

Great post and so well said, some people have nothing better to do than post Crap, Juddy had no one taking votes of him at Carlton. He has won it and in all honesty it should have been his 3rd Brownlow, Now spend more time brushing that Tooth and less time typing Dribble..

 

[Bollox]

The perfect combination.
A name player and captain standing out in an average list.
An umpire darling.

With hindsight i dont believe i didnt see it coming...and everyone else.

Gets a vote for parking straight when turning up.

Swan was a classic bandwagon...just one that may have deserved it, but pie money brought the odds into something stupid, and as usual the media just put the spinnaker up and sailed downwind with it.

 

[Monkey King]

ummmmm, where did I say Swan should have won it?
Where did I say Judd shouldn't have?
It seems you have gone off half cocked again.

Just bizarre! Did I ever claim you said these things? Of course I didn't. So buggered if you're making any sense here. Talk about half-cocked.

What I said was that a player infracting on the rules during a football match is a very relevant consideration when it comes to discussion about the perceived honesty/dishonesty of awarding votes that culminate in a best and fairest award.

Beyond the season in which the medal is awarded - in this case 2010 - the term best and fairesthas no bearing whatsoever. Being unsupported by anything official or actual, you've instead had to make believe your own special link between the term and an incident that happened 3+ years ago.

Good luck to you. Forgive me for being sharp enough to realise that is completely stupid and pointing it out to you.

 

[Monkey King]

MK,..I couldn't give a rats clacker who won the Brown nose. .. It's an irrelevant midfielders award and goes under the pretense of being a Best & Fairest award.

Great! So what are you doing posting here again?

By any chance, did you head over to the Brownlow thread to see how they managed to get the result pretty spot on by actually keeping track of game-to-game performances?

 

[Football Pope]

Great! So what are you doing posting here again?

By any chance, did you head over to the Brownlow thread to see how they managed to get the result pretty spot on by actually keeping track of game-to-game performances?

Wasn't aware that you are the keeper of the gate.. on this topics postings..Congratulations on that!....As I said it's an irrelevant award.. Umpires casting votes on best afield will always put doubt on their impartial judgment..Rightly or wrongly they are viewed as having favorites. Which is on topic..leads towards fixing ..
The Brownlow has lost its appeal to me and a lot of folk, who have a disbelief or non-acceptance of the umpires integrity...

Great for you Judd won... Enjoy the moment....

 

[Monkey King]

... trying to explain the way another person who is thinking "conspiracy" may be looking at the situation.

No need. I already knew the conspiracy theories were stupid. I didn't require your example.

As for your tendency to get personal in your posts, how about you just play the ball big fella, wouldn't want to see you carded

 

[Wiggo]

I was at the Carl V Coll game that gave 3 votes to Judd. I was there with a Collingwood supporter (how embarrassing) and we both commented after the game that Judd was BOG despite the 9 goal drubbing.

It's great to see that umpires can give votes to an individual rather than the best player from the winning side.

Brownlow = Umpire
MVP = others

 

[Pinnell]

I was at the Carl V Coll game that gave 3 votes to Judd. I was there with a Collingwood supporter (how embarrassing) and we both commented after the game that Judd was BOG despite the 9 goal drubbing.

It's great to see that umpires can give votes to an individual rather than the best player from the winning side.

Brownlow = Umpire
MVP = others

Led the coaches votes as well that day. I can't be bothered reading the rest of the thread. I came in to let whoever created this thread know that I got a great laugh when I saw the title! THanks for brightning up my day! Was it you that also suggested Phar Lap never died and came back to win the Melbourne Cup as Peter Pan?

 

[db swannie]

You know the post. It's basically the last one in which I discussed the incident. Since then I've just been waiting for a response from you, but for some reason all you want to do is rabbit on about some incident from last season or even earlier.

You haven't produced any bloody evidence! You keep telling me that you are going to, that you will, that you have evidence, blahdeblah.

You keep threatening to bring out this evidence of yours, stop banging on about it like Geoffery Bloody Robertson and either put it out there or desist will ya...

Handily you YET AGAIN avoided answering my question honestly about Judd being a two-time gouger. Nice one...

 

[Monkey King]

You haven't produced any bloody evidence! You keep telling me that you are going to, that you will, that you have evidence, blahdeblah.

Evidence you say? Hmm ... I don't think so. I said that I made a conclusion based on logic and anatomical principles; I referred to various points during the incident where these applied ... your response was to talk about eye-gouging.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

You haven't produced any bloody evidence! You keep telling me that you are going to, that you will, that you have evidence, blahdeblah.

You keep threatening to bring out this evidence of yours, stop banging on about it like Geoffery Bloody Robertson and either put it out there or desist will ya...

Handily you YET AGAIN avoided answering my question honestly about Judd being a two-time gouger. Nice one...

take your own advice buddy

 

[adelaidecrows]

I can understand people disagreeing with the results of the brownlow but shit since judd as won every man and his dog has bagged the result.

I cant beleive it. what happened to honouring the winner?

Cornseys on SA radio bagging the result, fans are saying the systems rigged etc. what a joke.

The whole idea of the brownlow is that the umpires vote 1,2,3 for the best players in any particular match and at the end of the year the votes are tallied and we have a winner. for people saying swan was robbed you need to face reality. The coaches awards, mvp etc are all voted on after the end of the season when they have an overall view of the year. umpires have a round by round view which will always make a different result 9 times out of 10 to those awards.

people should just accept the votes for what they are.

 

[chefmeister]

If you want to look a little skinnier, you should hang around with fat people.

If you want to appear to be a better footballer and stand out amongst your peers, you should play for Carlton Football Club.

LOL, quite witty...

 

[bourbons]

Umm why the hell was my post deleted? Here it is again, best as I can remember..

reason why others might.
And if you think that one is unfathomably possible then you are quite naive.
Bitch and moan all you like but if it would be absolutely impossible then this thread wouldn't even exist.

I'd say you're the one who's naive if you're basing how 'possible' things are on bigfooty threads

Now if some punter laid out big dollars at the start of the year they would do as much as possible to protect that investment.
Like slip a few bucks to the MRP for example.
I believe it is a fanciful scenario too, but surely you must see how it could be just a little bit possible and that others could imagine it too?
After all, stranger things have, and continue to happen.

Sorry mate this is just rubbish. Name one thing we know has happened in the AFL that is 'stranger' than a big punter flat-out bribing the MRP for a favourable decision.

I mean seriously

Whats more likely - that one of the most inconsistent panels in the history of sport made a dodgy decision, or that someone loaded up on Juddy and subsequently managed to influence a 3 man MRP decision for their own personal gain?

Tinfoil hats all round!

 

[db swannie]

Evidence you say? Hmm ... I don't think so. I said that I made a conclusion based on logic and anatomical principles; I referred to various points during the incident where these applied ... your response was to talk about eye-gouging.

You have never produced any conclusions based on logic and anatomical principles. You have only ever talked about producing them!

You also said Judd wasn't a two-time gouger, didn't you?

 

[Blues_Man]

You have never produced any conclusions based on logic and anatomical principles. You have only ever talked about producing them!

You also said Judd wasn't a two-time gouger, didn't you?

It's amusing when idiots keep posting the same old garbage without any evidence to back up their statements..it's like they think they get some kind of dispensation for lying if they just keep repeating the same lies over and over again.

Nobody is interested in your stupidity, come back when you have something factual to say .

 

[db swannie]

It's amusing when idiots keep posting the same old garbage without any evidence to back up their statements..it's like they think they get some kind of dispensation for lying if they just keep repeating the same lies over and over again.

Nobody is interested in your stupidity, come back when you have something factual to say .

Outstanding post. Having failed (perhaps through laziness) to follow the tenor and (maybe even timbre?) of the conversation (albeit at times segregated) between myself and MK, you fall into the common trap, afforded both sides, wherein you spill your emotional seed for a kindred spirit, a fellow traveller, as they say.

A fellow traveller is calling. The waves are high, the raft is adrift far from shore, and they need your help. Triple 0 perhaps?

Talk Judd. That is what the thread is about, in the end. I made a statement, it is not fact, but it is my interpretation. Wipe my arse in the tears of Judd. About as likely as getting the truth. I shall accept that, the stalemate. And the carnage, the truth. I watched a show back to front, or sideways actually, really. It was weird, my wife and I were hallucinating, inventing new methods of watching a tv show. "There's two narratives. One is travelling backwards, and the other forwards." It got confusing.

Don Draper is a fellow working hard, on something.

Eddy Fry had a friend. But he was also a bludger.

Eddy worked with a guy named Lobster.

Lobster recalled:

I once told Eddy to take the mower down the back of the base. He did, but then he sat on his mower and smoked and drank Coke, bludging.

Eddy is like you, or me, or the other guy.

Eddy then said he had to leave early, as his uncle had jack-knifed his carvan on the Bulli Pass.

It's lucky one's purse...

Lobster, my friend, talked about his work mate, called Angry Brian. He had a wiry neck and he veins stuck out. In his neck, that is. Like Benny Hill and all...

I think of Cortazar. Often indeed. And the Sydney Swans, you ****************

 

[Monkey King]

You have never produced any conclusions based on logic and anatomical principles.

If you weren't busy being lame by suggesting I was practicing how to use a thesaurus because I used words like "anterior plane", perhaps you would have noticed

 

[bushdog89]

Call me a blinkered Collingwood supporter but I barely even noticed him this year! Didn't create any headlines at all... I'm staggered he beat Swan and Ablett... but I guess with Collingwood having Swan, Pendlebury and Didak and Geelong having Ablett, Bartel and Selwood stealing votes off each other, whereas Juddy playing a lone hand at Carlton... plus being an umpire's favourite counting in his favour...

I understand all Carlton supporters getting right behind Juddy as their sole hope in the Brownlow, of course I do as I followed Nathan Buckley for all those years Collingwood was missing out on the finals altogether... but don't forget a) his missed the first 3 games of the season to suspension, and b) he nailed Fremantle superstar and very fair player Matthew Pavlich square in the cheekbone with his elbow and split it wide open... permanently scarring his face for life...

And what did he get for that? Absolutely nothing... it's like Judd is a law onto himself in the AFL... you remember when Tony Lockett did it what happened? Tony Lockett was probably a far superior player to Judd and there is not many players you can say that kind of thing about... but Lockett was absolutely cruficied in the media and by the tribunal when he caved in that Sydney player's nose. From memory, I think he got 16 weeks!!

Juddy, nothin... nothin at all...

And he comes back from his 3 game suspension to poll 5 back to back best on grounds???? That has NEVER been done in history!!!

Look I don't want to write off Judd as a bloke or a player, I'm doing my absolute best to take off my Collingwood cap and haven't implicated the Carlton Football Club in any of this at all...

But something fishy is afoot... As if somebody KNEW everybody would think that nobody would think Juddy truly had a rat's chance of winning the Brownlow what with missing the first three games and then narrowly avoiding an extended holiday care of the tribunal...

I mean, Dane Swan's odds before the count were something like $1.20, Judd, although a previous winner and clearly the best player on his team, was paying $21.00!!! Never ever have his odds been so high, never ever has someone else's odds been so low...

Wouldn't take much money to make a serious killing off the bookies if you knew Judd was an absolute certainty to win, would it?

I mean you bet what probably $5 on a Judd-Swan quinella and nearly win $170! Imagine KNOWING Judd would win and chucking $10,000 on it...

Read this article about it...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/21/3018055.htm?site=thedrum

I don't know but something really stinks here...

Not just Collingwood supporters, a LOT of other supporters are saying similar kind of things.

We know this isn't right...

Please God, tell me corruption and the bookies have not struck the AFL...

But when you think about it, of course they have...

I really doubt even that Judd or Carlton or many in the AFL would have had a clue about this but I mean with Swan having 20 chances to Judd's 1 according to the bookies, it's a major fluke and surprise... and who better to artificially elevate but deflect conspiracy theories away from than to give it to Judd, the figure that Collingwood and their favourite Dane Swan hate most, knowing at the start of the year with Ball and Jolly signing to Collingwood they were about to have a pretty good year and Swan would be most likely the favourite.

Hell, throw in Ablett, the other one who looked like a sure bet at season's start, go Judd-Ablett-Swan in a trifecta what did you get?

Pretty mind spinning, huh? Did you see, even Juddy himself thought so too...

I feel sorry for him being put in this position... by his standards, he had an ORDINARY year. Barely made All- Australian team on the bench, and wasn't top 5 in any of the other major awards...

And remember in the Brownlow there is NO chance... it is ALL decided by the pen of a human... so imagine if you and your 6 or so umpire mates had it set so you would all only umpire Carlton games this year, you seen him get rubbed out at the end of last season and see his odds go sky high... and you know that YOU are the one who decides all this...

Why not plonk $100,000 at 101-1 and set yourself up for life?

Well said - what a joke and stain on the AFL. Judd was not even close to the best player this year. How is it possible that you can be beaten by collingwood by 10 goals and then best on ground - IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. just look at the norm smith as an example. how many players in losing sides have won it? i think its 3 - Buckley, Ablett and can't remember the third, in over 100 years. When your side is getting beaten by that much, you are clearly not the best player on the ground - if you were your team would not be getting smashed in the center.

also when carlton played saints. Hayes stitched judd up like a stocking, really made him look foolish and then Judd got best on ground and Hayes 0 votes. WHAT A JOKE!

Dane Swan polled 950 MVP votes, judd polled 150 - explain the difference there, maybe it is because judd arches his back and grits his teeth for no reason that gets him the attention. or maybe, like ablett the umpires feel sorry for the guys who cant grow a full head of hair!

the Brownlow has no credibility!

 

[Monkey King]

How is it possible that you can be beaten by collingwood by 10 goals and then best on ground - IT IS NOT POSSIBLE.

Was BOG in the coaches award that game too, so it's fair to say it IS POSSIBLE. Opinion sure is divided, but there have been even Collingwood fans saying Judd was best player on the field in that game.

You should read this post and then read though the Brownlowhttp://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=746174 thread he mentions.

 

[Vapor]

You should read this post and then read though the Brownlow thread he mentions.

Pretty much sums it up.

And just a sample of some of the final counts - http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=746174&page=66

Judd clearly in top 3 for most people, with some correctly predicting as the winner

 

[Blues_Man]

the Brownlow has no credibility!

ha ha ha i'm loving all the whinging and whining by the pies ferals ..if the Saints roll them on Saturday it will be priceless watching them froth and foam at the mouth

 

[sydjackson]

Well said - what a joke and stain on the AFL. Judd was not even close to the best player this year. How is it possible that you can be beaten by collingwood by 10 goals and then best on ground - IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. just look at the norm smith as an example. how many players in losing sides have won it? i think its 3 - Buckley, Ablett and can't remember the third, in over 100 years. When your side is getting beaten by that much, you are clearly not the best player on the ground - if you were your team would not be getting smashed in the center.

also when carlton played saints. Hayes stitched judd up like a stocking, really made him look foolish and then Judd got best on ground and Hayes 0 votes. WHAT A JOKE!

Dane Swan polled 950 MVP votes, judd polled 150 - explain the difference there, maybe it is because judd arches his back and grits his teeth for no reason that gets him the attention. or maybe, like ablett the umpires feel sorry for the guys who cant grow a full head of hair!

the Brownlow has no credibility!

Again, another complete dill.
As pointed out ad nauseum by others, both coaches nominated Judd as BOG in that match. Therefore your claim is revealed as either Judd, or Carlton hatred, or both.
Secondly, the Norm Smith medal has only been in place since Norm Smith died so forget your 100 years angle. The other one was Maurice Rioli.

 

[Monkey King]

The other one was Maurice Rioli.

Actually there was another. His name was ... wait for it ... Chris Judd

Seems there's more to the world than young bushdog ever knew possible. lol

 

[mediumsizered]

Actually there was another. His name was ... wait for it ... Chris Judd

Seems there's more to the world than young bushdog ever knew possible. lol

The Norm Smith Medal therefore must also have no credibility.