Dally M Votes Vs Souths

[Tiger_Fanatic3]

Who votes for this crap? LM grubbiest guy on field, cops a Dally M point for every judiciary charge. And no Tigers get points.. Tigers were the far better side for 90% of the game. The Dally Ms are the laughing stock of 2021.

 

[twentyforty]

Who votes for this crap? LM grubbiest guy on field, cops a Dally M point for every judiciary charge. And no Tigers get points.. Tigers were the far better side for 90% of the game. The Dally Ms are the laughing stock of 2021.

Dally M awards are a disgrace to its namesake.

 

[frullens]

Joel and fletch review the dally ms on their SEN show. Fletch said that Douehi should of got a look in.

For wests to draw and be ahead due most of the match, and not get at least one player s vote is crazy.

But it also shows what a team effort it was and we weren't a team of individuals.

 

[happy_tiger]

You have to be kidding Corey Parker - Souths-Tigers: 3 - Latrell Mitchell, 2 - Cameron Murray, 1 - Thomas Burgess. Judge: Corey Parker

Don't blame Corey ...little penis syndrome ....we all have the proof now

 

[OzLuke]

mitchell could take a dump in the middle of the pitch and still get 3 dally m points

 

[Yossarian]

14 all at full time but can’t jag a point? Parker is an idiot. Douhei was worth at least a point.

 

[twentyforty]

Dally M points are supposedly given to the “best and fairest” during the game. When Mitchell was found guilty of high contact to the head of a player off the ball he displayed unfair play, and was rightly banned for 4 weeks. The issue I have trouble reconciling is how can Corey Parker get it so wrong, by officially registering Mitchell as the “best and fairest” on the ground? I think the judiciary panel are suggesting he was the most unfair, by banning him?
What are the rules for correcting Parker’s error in judgement? Will Mitchell’s 3 points be deducted? And if so, will there be a redistribution of points?

 

[GNR4LIFE]

14 all at full time but can’t jag a point? Parker is an idiot. Douhei was worth at least a point.

It’s just what happens when a team wins. If Burgess had dropped the ball and we were the ones who scored, we win, and the reflection of the game skews.

 

[Yossarian]

14 all at full time but can’t jag a point? Parker is an idiot. Douhei was worth at least a point.

It’s just what happens when a team wins. If Burgess had dropped the ball and we were the ones who scored, we win, and the reflection of the game skews.

I think it’s unusual for all votes to go to one team in a close game like that. To take your point, if Brooks scores the winner does Parker give us all 6 votes? Probably not because it’s ridiculous. Would he have still given all the points to Souths players if we won? Possibly. Which would have made the situation even more ridiculous.

From my observations you generally need to win convincingly to monopolise the voting points.

 

[jadtiger]

14 all at full time but can’t jag a point? Parker is an idiot. Douhei was worth at least a point.

It’s just what happens when a team wins. If Burgess had dropped the ball and we were the ones who scored, we win, and the reflection of the game skews.

I think it’s unusual for all votes to go to one team in a close game like that. To take your point, if Brooks scores the winner does Parker give us all 6 votes? Probably not because it’s ridiculous. Would he have still given all the points to Souths players if we won? Possibly. Which would have made the situation even more ridiculous.

From my observations you generally need to win convincingly to monopolise the voting points.

You are completely correct however you must remember Parker is a queenslander.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

14 all at full time but can’t jag a point? Parker is an idiot. Douhei was worth at least a point.

It’s just what happens when a team wins. If Burgess had dropped the ball and we were the ones who scored, we win, and the reflection of the game skews.

I think it’s unusual for all votes to go to one team in a close game like that. To take your point, if Brooks scores the winner does Parker give us all 6 votes? Probably not because it’s ridiculous. Would he have still given all the points to Souths players if we won? Possibly. Which would have made the situation even more ridiculous.

From my observations you generally need to win convincingly to monopolise the voting points.

I’d say he’d have given 3 and 2 to us, and 1 to Souths. Who knows what he would have done, but it would have been almost the first time in history a judge would have given all 6 points to a losing team had Brooks try been awarded

 

[joeblock]

Dally M points are supposedly given to the “best and fairest” during the game. When Mitchell was found guilty of high contact to the head of a player off the ball he displayed unfair play, and was rightly banned for 4 weeks. The issue I have trouble reconciling is how can Corey Parker get it so wrong, by officially registering Mitchell as the “best and fairest” on the ground? I think the judiciary panel are suggesting he was the most unfair, by banning him?
What are the rules for correcting Parker’s error in judgement? Will Mitchell’s 3 points be deducted? And if so, will there be a redistribution of points?

From articles I've read.
A suspended player loses 3 dally m points per game out, so minus 12 for latrell. Leaves him on 1 point upon return.
Also mentioned, 2 suspensions in a season makes a player ineligible.
One article says a suspension of more than 2 games makes a player ineligible.
I assume a player who is ineligible to win medal can still get match votes after suspension is served but not sure.
Points aren't redistributed, as you say its a best and fairest award, they shouldn't have gone to latrell in the first place but that was done so just taken away upon suspension.

Side note- long term lurker, it is nice to know I'm not alone suffering this emotionally crippling wests tigers addiction.

 

[twentyforty]

Dally M points are supposedly given to the “best and fairest” during the game. When Mitchell was found guilty of high contact to the head of a player off the ball he displayed unfair play, and was rightly banned for 4 weeks. The issue I have trouble reconciling is how can Corey Parker get it so wrong, by officially registering Mitchell as the “best and fairest” on the ground? I think the judiciary panel are suggesting he was the most unfair, by banning him?
What are the rules for correcting Parker’s error in judgement? Will Mitchell’s 3 points be deducted? And if so, will there be a redistribution of points?

From articles I've read.
A suspended player loses 3 dally m points per game out, so minus 12 for latrell. Leaves him on 1 point upon return.
Also mentioned, 2 suspensions in a season makes a player ineligible.
One article says a suspension of more than 2 games makes a player ineligible.
I assume a player who is ineligible to win medal can still get match votes after suspension is served but not sure.
Points aren't redistributed, as you say its a best and fairest award, they shouldn't have gone to latrell in the first place but that was done so just taken away upon suspension.

Side note- long term lurker, it is nice to know I'm not alone suffering this emotionally crippling wests tigers addiction.

Haha yeh, we’re all long term sufferers ? and hopefuls. My neighbour is a Manly fanatic, I let him have it every chance I get, but I need a win this weekend ?
Thanks for the information. It doesn’t seem at all fair to other players when half of the 6 DallyM points are awarded to a player who doesn’t use them.

 

[69-05-41]

Did Corey Parker think he was auditioning as a NRL referee?