The Medal

[PhilH]

This from Wikipedia

Historically, players who are suspended at some time during the season by the AFL's disclipinary tribunal for serious on-field offences (for instance, striking, kicking or charging) were ineligible for the award. Suspended players have tallied the highest number of votes for the award on two occasions. This first occurred in 1996, when Corey McKernan received the same number of votes as winners James Hird and Michael Voss, but was ineligible due to suspension. (However, McKernan would be named the AFL Players Association MVP in the same year.) In the following year, Chris Grant of Western Bulldogs had the most votes, but a one-week suspension ruled him out of the Brownlow Medal, which went instead to St. Kilda's Robert Harvey.

Since 2005, the criterion for ineligibility is to have 100 base points levied by the Tribunal for an infraction in the season. This means that it is now possible for a player to be suspended, but still win the Brownlow. As an example, a player carries 93.75 points from a reprimand from the previous season, and commits an infraction worth 75 base points – this brings his tally to 168.75, which is enough for a one-week suspension, even with an early plea. Despite the suspension, this player would still be eligible for the prize. Similarly, a player can be ineligible, despite not having been suspended. This most commonly happens when a player is levied 125 base points, but it is reduced to 93.75 with an early plea – sufficiently low to avoid a suspension. This new system is slightly more confusing and slightly controversial, but also slightly fairer, since a bad tribunal record from previous years will not affect a player's chances of being the fairest and best in a single year


So let me correct myself ... You can be found guilty of an offence in the AFL and be eligible PROVIDED the points levied on you during the season (before ammendment) are less than 100.

[JK]

I though that until you missed a match you were elligable for the Brownlow. They made the change about 3 years back. Something else for me to research this afternoon.

Pretty sure with the early plea's now, you cop a reprimand for exceeding the points tally, but not earning enough for a week off ... Reckon Sammy Mitchell became ineligible that way, maybe Buddy too

[am Bays]

Gee you Norwood blokes haven't quite got over 1987 have you....

[JK]

Gee you Norwood blokes haven't quite got over 1987 have you....

What happened again 87? Cue Punky ...

[Adelaide Hawk]

I though that until you missed a match you were elligable for the Brownlow. They made the change about 3 years back. Something else for me to research this afternoon.

Pretty sure with the early plea's now, you cop a reprimand for exceeding the points tally, but not earning enough for a week off ... Reckon Sammy Mitchell became ineligible that way, maybe Buddy too

You'd be right about that. Buddy hasn't missed a game this year, but I know he's ineligible for the medal ... which pretty much sums up why I think these types of award are silly.

[cd]

AH that is why i believe in being true to the original award as devised by Mr Magarey not as the AFL have done in changing and making complicated the Brownlow Trophy.

Fairest must involve the umpires as the neutral judges.
Also the award doesnt take out toughness just those who step over the line and happen to be caught.

Col D
Personal Post Only

[Adelaide Hawk]

AH that is why i believe in being true to the original award as devised by Mr Magarey not as the AFL have done in changing and making complicated the Brownlow Trophy.

Fairest must involve the umpires as the neutral judges.
Also the award doesnt take out toughness just those who step over the line and happen to be caught.

Col D
Personal Post Only

How is eligibility for the Brownlow any different from eligibility for the Magarey?

[MightyEagles]

AH that is why i believe in being true to the original award as devised by Mr Magarey not as the AFL have done in changing and making complicated the Brownlow Trophy.

Fairest must involve the umpires as the neutral judges.
Also the award doesnt take out toughness just those who step over the line and happen to be caught.

Col D
Personal Post Only

How is eligibility for the Brownlow any different from eligibility for the Magarey?

Because there's a points system in the AFL when you are reported and found guilty and there's not in the SANFL.

[cd]

correct ME

Col D

[Adelaide Hawk]

AH that is why i believe in being true to the original award as devised by Mr Magarey not as the AFL have done in changing and making complicated the Brownlow Trophy.

Fairest must involve the umpires as the neutral judges.
Also the award doesnt take out toughness just those who step over the line and happen to be caught.

Col D
Personal Post Only

How is eligibility for the Brownlow any different from eligibility for the Magarey?

Because there's a points system in the AFL when you are reported and found guilty and there's not in the SANFL.

So what? Players are under far more scrutiny in the AFL and more likely to be reported and suspended. A Norwood player hit the deck last week, was carried off on a stretcher, and nobody knows what happened, even though it was in the play. If it happened in AFL, you can guarantee we would know.

I've seen guys in the SANFL deck other players and then get off at the tribunal because of lack of video evidence. Points system or not, players are ruled ineligible for Brownlows even though they don't miss a game .. ala Sam Mitchell and Lance Franklin this season.

So I ask again ... how are the rules for eligibility for a Brownlw Medal any different to the Magarey? Still waiting.

[PhilH]

The difference.....

-SANFL, if you are guilty you are inelligible,

- AFL, if you are guilty you may still be elligible if you incur less than 100 points (pre adjustment) in a season.

[MightyEagles]

The difference.....

-SANFL, if you are guilty you are inelligible,

- AFL, if you are guilty you may still be elligible if you incur less than 100 points (pre adjustment) in a season.

You mean if you are found guilty.

[PhilH]

Touche ME

[Adelaide Hawk]

The difference.....

-SANFL, if you are guilty you are inelligible,

- AFL, if you are guilty you may still be elligible if you incur less than 100 points (pre adjustment) in a season.

That's a tribunal decision. That determines if a player is still eligible, and has nothing to do with the rules for eligibility for each medal.

I will ask a third time ..... How are the rules for eligibility for the Brownlow Medal any different to the Magarey Medal?

[cd]

As I see it AH to be eligible for the Magarey you must not have been found guilty of an offence.

To be eligible for the Brownlow you must not have been found guilty of an offence or found guilty of an offence but deemed not to be guilty enough to be declared ineligible.

MM very clear
B grey due to points for offences, early pleas and carry-over as explained by Phil above

Col D