Author Topic: 2010 Rising Star Award [merged]  (Read 13002 times)

FNM

  • Guest
Re: Rising Star 2010- Martin ?
« Reply #60 on: July 06, 2010, 03:32:57 PM »
I reckon a few of our kids have deserved a nomination recently
Don't know who it was, but we missed out again this week  >:(

Offline torch

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • 28YrM&8YrMRC 🏆🏆🏆 ‘17, ‘19-‘20; 2 x Attendee 🐯
Re: Rising Star 2010- Martin ?
« Reply #61 on: July 06, 2010, 07:01:19 PM »
yes, Martin will poll most votes, but can not win it!

 :banghead

Offline Jacosh

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • No bish fish, the moon wasnt right.
Re: Rising Star 2010- Martin ?
« Reply #62 on: July 06, 2010, 07:43:29 PM »
What is the game/age limit for the RSA.
If for example he got a niggle and they decided to rest him for 2-3 games would he still be eligible to win it next season?

Not that I want that to happen just a hypothetical question.

Offline the_boy_jake

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Rising Star 2010- Martin ?
« Reply #63 on: July 06, 2010, 08:00:03 PM »
What is the game/age limit for the RSA.
If for example he got a niggle and they decided to rest him for 2-3 games would he still be eligible to win it next season?

Not that I want that to happen just a hypothetical question.


Think it is 10 games, and he has played all of our apart from Geelong, so he won't be eligible.

Who cares about it anyway?

Offline Jacosh

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • No bish fish, the moon wasnt right.
Re: Rising Star 2010- Martin ?
« Reply #64 on: July 06, 2010, 08:12:28 PM »
What is the game/age limit for the RSA.
If for example he got a niggle and they decided to rest him for 2-3 games would he still be eligible to win it next season?

Not that I want that to happen just a hypothetical question.


Think it is 10 games, and he has played all of our apart from Geelong, so he won't be eligible.

Who cares about it anyway?

It was simple curiosity. 
In the rules it states suspended, didn’t he take the early plea meaning he wasn’t suspended?
More curiosity Jake.


Offline Chuck17

  • The Shaun Grugg of OER
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13222
Re: Rising Star 2010- Martin ?
« Reply #65 on: July 06, 2010, 08:51:27 PM »
Don't think Martin wouyld give a stinking turd about the rising star anyway

Offline the_boy_jake

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Rising Star 2010- Martin ?
« Reply #66 on: July 06, 2010, 09:12:18 PM »
What is the game/age limit for the RSA.
If for example he got a niggle and they decided to rest him for 2-3 games would he still be eligible to win it next season?

Not that I want that to happen just a hypothetical question.


Think it is 10 games, and he has played all of our apart from Geelong, so he won't be eligible.

Who cares about it anyway?

It was simple curiosity. 
In the rules it states suspended, didn’t he take the early plea meaning he wasn’t suspended?
More curiosity Jake.



The NABRS works on the same rules as the Brownlow as far as I can tell.

This means if you are charged with something > 100 pts you are ineligible, no matter if you plead early and it gets reduced to 92.5 or whatever.

It also means that if someone with a bad record (e.g BBB Hall) got charged with something < 100 pts but in light of their bad record it got increased beyond 100pts they would be eligible.

I don't think there is a precedent for the latter case, where there is a precedent for the former in the Brownlow count a couple of seasons back (someone who was ineligible but didn't get suspended) I think it was Goodes in '08.

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 96301
    • One-Eyed Richmond
No Rising Star votes for Martin
« Reply #67 on: July 14, 2010, 04:59:35 AM »
Dusty won't even be getting any votes in the Rising Star Award because he was reprimanded

-------------------------------------------

As with Richmond's Dustin Martin, Grant is ineligible to win the award after accepting a reprimand for an offence that carried more than 100 base points.

But Martin was nominated in Round 10, after his reprimand. The junior club of each nominee receives a recognition and reward package of footballs and equipment.

Martin would be the favourite if he was eligible. He will still be invited to the award ceremony.

An AFL spokesman confirmed Martin would not be awarded any votes by the judges, unlike the Brownlow Medal where suspended players can tally votes.

Rising Star nominations are now prestigious, with Richmond coach Damian Hardwick last week pushing David Astbury's case.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/dogs-angry-at-lack-of-recognition-for-young-gun-jarrad-grant/story-e6frf9jf-1225891358372

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: No Rising Star votes for Martin
« Reply #68 on: July 14, 2010, 06:35:24 AM »

Martin would be the favourite if he was eligible. He will still be invited to the award ceremony.

An AFL spokesman confirmed Martin would not be awarded any votes by the judges, unlike the Brownlow Medal where suspended players can tally votes.


I would be telling the AFL to shove their invitation up their quoit with the biggest, fattest rocket they could find.  Can't be awarded votes - pffft - chicken sh1te award.

Offline wayne

  • Fame of Hall
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8426
  • In Absentia
Re: No Rising Star votes for Martin
« Reply #69 on: July 14, 2010, 09:53:15 AM »

An AFL spokesman confirmed Martin would not be awarded any votes by the judges, unlike the Brownlow Medal where suspended players can tally votes.

They don't want to be embarrassed. Dustin would win this award easily.
And you may not think I care for you
When you know down inside that I really do

Offline tiga

  • Exhaling Carbon in the
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5547
  • Yes Hampson has taken a mark!
Re: Martin gets Rising Star nomination [merged]
« Reply #70 on: July 14, 2010, 10:23:50 AM »
Stuff the Rising Star, Dustin has more important things to worry about like writing his acceptance speech for the Brownlow he will be collecting within in the next few years.  :thumbsup

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 96301
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Time to end Rising Star Award farce ‎(Herald-Sun)
« Reply #71 on: July 28, 2010, 07:17:41 PM »
AFL must change rules for Rising Star Award

    * Bruce Matthews
    * From: Herald Sun
    * July 28, 2010 5:27PM



IT'S time the AFL tinkered with the Rising Star Award fine print in the interests of the game, if not basic justice.

It's patently wrong that Richmond's Dustin Martin and now Western Bulldog Jarrad Grant are ineligible to win this season's prestigious award ... even though neither has been suspended.

This award celebrates the elite talent in our game and the panel of judges must overlook Martin, who has missed only one game with the Tigers, and Grant, who has pushed into a top-four team.

Both were cited by the match review panel for low-level offences - Martin for an illegal bump on Sydney's Josh Kennedy in Round 3 and Grant for what was effectively a block on unsuspecting Magpie Ben Reid in Round 11.

Martin accepted a reprimand while Grant is one of only two players to succeed at the tribunal this season when he had a two-games penalty downgraded to a reprimand.

Even the league's own Rising Star rules state that players found guilty and fined or reprimanded remain eligible to win the award.

But the technicality is that the base demerit points for each of these nominee's offences was 125, above the dreaded 100 that equates to a suspension unless you plead guilty and access the 25 per cent discount.

Yes, apply those stringent conditions to the Brownlow Medal. Even there you can mount a case that you wouldn't find a more solid citizen or glowing advertisement for the game than ineligible Chris Grant who topped the 1997 count. But that's another argument.

The fairest and best criteria is too heavy-handed for these enthusiastic, first-year recruits endeavouring to find their way in the game's toughest, most challenging and scrutinised competition.

Simply, the Rising Star should celebrate football talent alone.

These future champions' fashion sense, tastes in music or table manners are irrelevant.

We just want to know who the panel of ex-players decide is dux of the 2010 graduates based on kicks, marks, hardball gets and all the key indicators that identify the best.

Keep the strike-out clause for anyone who's actually suspended. After all, if a young player displays thuggish tendencies on game-day, the tribunal system will quickly weed him out.

But it's grossly unfair that Martin and Grant, leading contenders on form and ability, must sit through the awards lunch in September knowing they can accept nothing more than a meal and backslaps, even though they haven't actually breached the guidelines.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-must-end-rising-star-award-farce/story-e6frf9jf-1225898129861

Ox

  • Guest
Re: Martin gets Rising Star nomination [merged]
« Reply #72 on: July 28, 2010, 07:47:47 PM »
weak dogs.

Offline Jacosh

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • No bish fish, the moon wasnt right.
Re: Martin gets Rising Star nomination [merged]
« Reply #73 on: July 28, 2010, 07:52:05 PM »
Even the league's own Rising Star rules state that players found guilty and fined or reprimanded remain eligible to win the award.

But the technicality is that the base demerit points for each of these nominee's offences was 125, above the dreaded 100 that equates to a suspension unless you plead guilty and access the 25 per cent discount.


Correct me if im wrong but isnt this what Dusty did, plead guilty and got it reduced to a fine, in which case he is still eligible. Grant on the other hand challenged the tribunal and got his sanction reduced.
Niether was actually suspended.

Or am I just a dumb ass and reading this the wrong way?

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Re: Martin gets Rising Star nomination [merged]
« Reply #74 on: July 28, 2010, 08:51:00 PM »
Even the league's own Rising Star rules state that players found guilty and fined or reprimanded remain eligible to win the award.

But the technicality is that the base demerit points for each of these nominee's offences was 125, above the dreaded 100 that equates to a suspension unless you plead guilty and access the 25 per cent discount.


Correct me if im wrong but isnt this what Dusty did, plead guilty and got it reduced to a fine, in which case he is still eligible. Grant on the other hand challenged the tribunal and got his sanction reduced.
Niether was actually suspended.

Or am I just a dumb ass and reading this the wrong way?

Sorry Jacosh...did you say something?! I was a little distracted by your avatar  :o :eyebrow