Malceski chance for All Australian ?

[liz]

Kirky will poll very well in the Charlie this year and Melcho will get a few too .As for AA IMHO both of them will make it.

Sadly Kirk's not eligible though - and his lack of "flash factor" means he probably won't get all he deserves anyway.

Kirk really should be close to having wrapped up an AA spot by now - though I suspect again he may get overlooked because he's not as fashionable or flashy as the likes of the Kerrs, Burgoynes, Blacks of this world.

[ugg]

Sadly Kirk's not eligible though - and his lack of "flash factor" means he probably won't get all he deserves anyway.

Kirk really should be close to having wrapped up an AA spot by now - though I suspect again he may get overlooked because he's not as fashionable or flashy as the likes of the Kerrs, Burgoynes, Blacks of this world.

Why is Kirky not eligible? I can't recall him being in trouble with the tribunal this year.

He's usually polled pretty well in the past, and with the usual 'flashy' Swans in Hall and Goodes having a downer of a season I reckon he could poll a few.

[liz]

Why is Kirky not eligible? I can't recall him being in trouble with the tribunal this year.

He got a reprimand after the Port game when he bumped Chad Cornes front on. Was a bit stiff IMO (and the Fox Sports News team) because he was contesting the ball rather than bumping a player already with his head over the ball. And when he realised he was going to collide front on with Cornes he did all he could to shift his body so that most of the contact was to the shoulder rather than head on. But it was deemed to be negligent contact by the MRP and the Swans chose not to fight it, given he'd have missed a game had he lost.

[NMWBloods]

Kirky will poll very well in the Charlie this year and Melcho will get a few too .As for AA IMHO both of them will make it.

'Eski will get some votes, but won't win. Kirk will definitely get votes - should do pretty well.

'Eski won't make AA. Should be in line in 2008 or 2009 though.

Kirk's problem with AA is that they will normally pick a pure midfielder rather than a tagger/midfielder.

[swansrule100]

'Eski will get some votes, but won't win. Kirk will definitely get votes - should do pretty well.

'Eski won't make AA. Should be in line in 2008 or 2009 though.

Kirk's problem with AA is that they will normally pick a pure midfielder rather than a tagger/midfielder.

and ling probably would get any tagger midfield spot ahead of kirk this year

[liz]

Kirk's problem with AA is that they will normally pick a pure midfielder rather than a tagger/midfielder.

Anyone labelling Kirk as a tagger has no idea, though. He is averaging well over 20 possessions a game at the same time as keeping the likes of Shaun Burgoyne, Paul Hasleby and Scott West to a mere fraction of their normal output.

According to this week's record, he got double figure clearances last week - and a check of the stats table they put in there shows he's close to double the average clearance rate of all midfielders over the whole season.

[ugg]

It'll be harder this year with the new selection criteria where midfielders can only be named in the midfield or on the bench.

[giant]

A number of the pundits had Kirk in their AA team at the half way point - & he's only got better since then while a number of the Ferraris have dropped off. Bizarrely enough given his start to the season, Goodes' last 6-7 weeks must have him in the frame too. He's been good to excellent over that time.

[NMWBloods]

Anyone labelling Kirk as a tagger has no idea, though. He is averaging well over 20 possessions a game at the same time as keeping the likes of Shaun Burgoyne, Paul Hasleby and Scott West to a mere fraction of their normal output.

According to this week's record, he got double figure clearances last week - and a check of the stats table they put in there shows he's close to double the average clearance rate of all midfielders over the whole season.

Yes, but he is still a combo, and his disposal is below the quality of the top midfielders.

[ScottH]

Yes, but he is still a combo, and his disposal is below the quality of the top midfielders.

That should read "his disposal by foot".

His quick hands are his greatest asset.

[cressakel]

He got a reprimand after the Port game when he bumped Chad Cornes front on. Was a bit stiff IMO (and the Fox Sports News team) because he was contesting the ball rather than bumping a player already with his head over the ball. And when he realised he was going to collide front on with Cornes he did all he could to shift his body so that most of the contact was to the shoulder rather than head on. But it was deemed to be negligent contact by the MRP and the Swans chose not to fight it, given he'd have missed a game had he lost.

Kirky is still eligible for the Brownlow. Placed some hard earned on Kirky at $61 for Charlie after the Geelong game in Round 13. I asked the bloke at the TAB if Kirky was still eligible and he said if he listed he is eligible. I believe a reprimand still makes you eligible for the Brownlow. If he isn't eligible, the guy at the TAB has a lot to answer for.....

I think Kirky has a big chance as the games we have lost by small margins he has been our best and will possibly get a vote or two. The games we have won Kirky has been front and centre in our best.

NB: I think you will also find Spida will have 3 or 4 BOG's and possibly 10-12 votes in the Brownlow at this stage of calculations. IMO he was BOG in the Richmond, Hawthorn and Carlton games.

[ugg]

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownlow_Medal

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.

How many base points was Kirk charged with?

[NMWBloods]

I assume it must be below 100 as he didn't get suspended.

[reigning premier]

If Eski doesn't make AA, it will be the biggest travesty of justice since Goodes was legged running into goal in the 2005 Qualifying final.

[ugg]

I assume it must be below 100 as he didn't get suspended.

But isn't that why the Swans pleaded guilty? If they had contested and lost he would have been suspended so that suggests the base points was greater than 100.