I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think Brisbane will win).
IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
On Monday night, Eddie called Ricciuto a "1998 premiership player". That annoyed me. Roo was injured for the 1997 finals, but he was a big part of Adelaide getting there. In fact he was one of Adelaide's 2 all-Australians in 1997. The other was Tony Modra, who did his knee in the Prelim. Ricciuto at least got to play the 1998 GF. Modra (like McCartney, and possibly Rocca) was a huge part of his team's Premiership success but has no medal to show for it. It's a joke that relative hacks like A.Keating, Rintoul and Sampson are "Premiership Players" because they happened to be fit on GF day in 1997, yet Modra is not.
The usual argument is that giving more medals devalues the Premiership medal, or that those outside the 22 didn't contribute on the day. I disagree. Hey, if we only give medals to those who only contribute on the day, why not take a few more away? IIRC, David Pittman was on the bench for all of Adelaide's 2nd half comeback in 1998. No (1998) medal for him then? And ditto Rod Jamieson who was injured in the opening minutes in 1997? (My Crows bias is coming through here, I'm sure there's examples from other clubs).
I haven't noticed anyone complain that the Brownlow is devalued now that it is awarded to those who "lose" the tie-break. And I'm sure no "Premiership Players" will begrudge Premiership medals to teammates who, for whatever reason, didn't happen to be in the team on GF day.
If Collingwood win on Saturday, it'd be great if Rocca could still come up and get a medal. Cause he'd have contributed a lot more to the Premiership than lots of the players on the day.
> I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a > good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think > Brisbane will win).
> IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who > took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day > are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute > to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
> On Monday night, Eddie called Ricciuto a "1998 premiership player". > That annoyed me. Roo was injured for the 1997 finals, but he was a big > part of Adelaide getting there. In fact he was one of Adelaide's 2 > all-Australians in 1997. The other was Tony Modra, who did his knee in > the Prelim. Ricciuto at least got to play the 1998 GF. Modra (like > McCartney, and possibly Rocca) was a huge part of his team's > Premiership success but has no medal to show for it. It's a joke that > relative hacks like A.Keating, Rintoul and Sampson are "Premiership > Players" because they happened to be fit on GF day in 1997, yet Modra > is not.
> The usual argument is that giving more medals devalues the Premiership > medal, or that those outside the 22 didn't contribute on the day. I > disagree. Hey, if we only give medals to those who only contribute on > the day, why not take a few more away? IIRC, David Pittman was on the > bench for all of Adelaide's 2nd half comeback in 1998. No (1998) medal > for him then? And ditto Rod Jamieson who was injured in the opening > minutes in 1997? (My Crows bias is coming through here, I'm sure > there's examples from other clubs).
> I haven't noticed anyone complain that the Brownlow is devalued now > that it is awarded to those who "lose" the tie-break. And I'm sure no > "Premiership Players" will begrudge Premiership medals to teammates > who, for whatever reason, didn't happen to be in the team on GF day.
> If Collingwood win on Saturday, it'd be great if Rocca could still > come up and get a medal. Cause he'd have contributed a lot more to the > Premiership than lots of the players on the day.
what's in a medal anyway? Those who contributed are usually recognised for it, regardless of medals. The fact the Modra never got one does not detract from him one bit - he just didn't play on that day.
> > > I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a > > > good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think > > > Brisbane will win).
> > > IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who > > > took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day > > > are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute > > > to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
> > > On Monday night, Eddie called Ricciuto a "1998 premiership player". > > > That annoyed me. Roo was injured for the 1997 finals, but he was a big > > > part of Adelaide getting there. In fact he was one of Adelaide's 2 > > > all-Australians in 1997. The other was Tony Modra, who did his knee in > > > the Prelim. Ricciuto at least got to play the 1998 GF. Modra (like > > > McCartney, and possibly Rocca) was a huge part of his team's > > > Premiership success but has no medal to show for it. It's a joke that > > > relative hacks like A.Keating, Rintoul and Sampson are "Premiership > > > Players" because they happened to be fit on GF day in 1997, yet Modra > > > is not.
> > > The usual argument is that giving more medals devalues the Premiership > > > medal, or that those outside the 22 didn't contribute on the day. I > > > disagree. Hey, if we only give medals to those who only contribute on > > > the day, why not take a few more away? IIRC, David Pittman was on the > > > bench for all of Adelaide's 2nd half comeback in 1998. No (1998) medal > > > for him then? And ditto Rod Jamieson who was injured in the opening > > > minutes in 1997? (My Crows bias is coming through here, I'm sure > > > there's examples from other clubs).
> > > I haven't noticed anyone complain that the Brownlow is devalued now > > > that it is awarded to those who "lose" the tie-break. And I'm sure no > > > "Premiership Players" will begrudge Premiership medals to teammates > > > who, for whatever reason, didn't happen to be in the team on GF day.
> > > If Collingwood win on Saturday, it'd be great if Rocca could still > > > come up and get a medal. Cause he'd have contributed a lot more to the > > > Premiership than lots of the players on the day.
> Why the hell should players who did not participate on the ground for their > team on Grand Final day receive anything? I can't believe this issue is > raised every year ...
> The 22 players who contribute to their winning team on the day that counts > should be the only ones to receive medals - suspended players, players not > picked in the team (but have played during the year) because there not good > enough get no sympathy at all from me. > I feel most sorry for injured players (eg. Tarkyn Lockyer) who IF fit would > easily slot into the Collingwood team. Unfortunately for them, they won't > get anything - but that's life unfortunately.
> I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a > good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think > Brisbane will win).
> IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who > took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day > are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute > to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
> On Monday night, Eddie called Ricciuto a "1998 premiership player". > That annoyed me. Roo was injured for the 1997 finals, but he was a big > part of Adelaide getting there. In fact he was one of Adelaide's 2 > all-Australians in 1997. The other was Tony Modra, who did his knee in > the Prelim. Ricciuto at least got to play the 1998 GF. Modra (like > McCartney, and possibly Rocca) was a huge part of his team's > Premiership success but has no medal to show for it. It's a joke that > relative hacks like A.Keating, Rintoul and Sampson are "Premiership > Players" because they happened to be fit on GF day in 1997, yet Modra > is not.
> The usual argument is that giving more medals devalues the Premiership > medal, or that those outside the 22 didn't contribute on the day. I > disagree. Hey, if we only give medals to those who only contribute on > the day, why not take a few more away? IIRC, David Pittman was on the > bench for all of Adelaide's 2nd half comeback in 1998. No (1998) medal > for him then? And ditto Rod Jamieson who was injured in the opening > minutes in 1997? (My Crows bias is coming through here, I'm sure > there's examples from other clubs).
> I haven't noticed anyone complain that the Brownlow is devalued now > that it is awarded to those who "lose" the tie-break. And I'm sure no > "Premiership Players" will begrudge Premiership medals to teammates > who, for whatever reason, didn't happen to be in the team on GF day.
> If Collingwood win on Saturday, it'd be great if Rocca could still > come up and get a medal. Cause he'd have contributed a lot more to the > Premiership than lots of the players on the day.
> I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a > good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think > Brisbane will win).
> IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who > took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day > are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute > to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
On 24 Sep 2003 19:28:56 -0700, pball...@ozemail.com.au (Peter Ballard) wrote:
>G'day all,
>I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a >good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think >Brisbane will win).
>IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who >took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day >are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute >to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
>On Monday night, Eddie called Ricciuto a "1998 premiership player". >That annoyed me. Roo was injured for the 1997 finals, but he was a big >part of Adelaide getting there. In fact he was one of Adelaide's 2 >all-Australians in 1997. The other was Tony Modra, who did his knee in >the Prelim. Ricciuto at least got to play the 1998 GF. Modra (like >McCartney, and possibly Rocca) was a huge part of his team's >Premiership success but has no medal to show for it. It's a joke that >relative hacks like A.Keating, Rintoul and Sampson are "Premiership >Players" because they happened to be fit on GF day in 1997, yet Modra >is not.
>The usual argument is that giving more medals devalues the Premiership >medal, or that those outside the 22 didn't contribute on the day. I >disagree. Hey, if we only give medals to those who only contribute on >the day, why not take a few more away? IIRC, David Pittman was on the >bench for all of Adelaide's 2nd half comeback in 1998. No (1998) medal >for him then? And ditto Rod Jamieson who was injured in the opening >minutes in 1997? (My Crows bias is coming through here, I'm sure >there's examples from other clubs).
>I haven't noticed anyone complain that the Brownlow is devalued now >that it is awarded to those who "lose" the tie-break. And I'm sure no >"Premiership Players" will begrudge Premiership medals to teammates >who, for whatever reason, didn't happen to be in the team on GF day.
>If Collingwood win on Saturday, it'd be great if Rocca could still >come up and get a medal. Cause he'd have contributed a lot more to the >Premiership than lots of the players on the day.
Interesting concept, however.... What if Billy Bloggs who gets a game in R1, dropped R2, does not play for the remainder of the season... according to you, he played, thus gets a Premiership medal? What if a player is delisted/sacked for disciplinary reasons yet his team goes on to win the flag... does he get one too?
Just adding more food for thought, to what in principle, could work.
> I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a > good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think > Brisbane will win).
> IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who > took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day > are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute > to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
Like most things, your idea will come to fruition only when it affects Collingwood. Just as the finals suspension is now an issue whereas we didn't hear Eddie bleat when McCartney was rubbed out 4 years ago. It's all worthy debate - would just be nice if Collingwood people recognised injustices before they occur to their own kind.
> I posted a similar thing in 1999 (re. Jason McCartney) and now seems a > good time to toss it in again with the Rocca thing (though I think > Brisbane will win).
> IMHO, Premiership medals should go to every player at the club who > took the field during the year. This notion that only the 22 on GF day > are "Premiership players" is just ridiculous. All players contribute > to premiership success, not just those who are in the 22 on GF day.
-- > Regards,
> Peter Ballard
Peter,
I totally agree with you though I've seen already some who do not (and who do not know how to argue with good grace!). For these people I stress that this is not a 'Knock-Out' cup, but a 'Premiership', which is of course a 'Championship' based upon the whole season. To my mind the whole comp is devalued if only that one game counts. What the hell is the point of playing 22 rounds? might as well start the knock-out in round 1 and then in 4 weeks it's over! But this is the culmination of a whole season (well, nearly, as it's still not a true 'league' which would require all teams playing each other twice) and some players may have had huge contributions, then been injured in the last Finals game (maybe as a result of a 'Rocca' style hit!). These players should receive some recognition. Heck, the Pies could bring in a first game player for the Final who does nothing, but the Pies win, and he gets a medal whilst Rocca gets nothing! No, I am not a Pies supporter but this does seem wrong to me. For those who say, '..yes, but he did play in the Final' I would reply that those who miss it have also contributed.
> Interesting concept, however.... > What if Billy Bloggs who gets a game in R1, dropped R2, does not play > for the remainder of the season... according to you, he played, thus > gets a Premiership medal? What if a player is delisted/sacked for > disciplinary reasons yet his team goes on to win the flag... does he > get one too?
> Just adding more food for thought, to what in principle, could work.
> Hooroo......
In My opinion they both deserve medals. they both played in premership winning sides (note i said sides not teams) so theerfore they should get one
> If you are sent off during the F.A. Cup Final (& possibly the World Cup > final, I'm, not sure) you do not receive a winner's medal.
> Just some more food for thought.
> Regards > Julian
. But, if you are sent off in the Semi-Final? However, wrong logic. The FA Cup is a Knockout comp. If you are sent off in a league game but you win the champ, you still get a medal....yes!
|
