3 McGrath
2 Heppell
1 Redman
3 McGrath
2 Redman
1 Hobbs
3 McGrath
2 Redman
1 Hobbs
McGrath
Redman
Hobbs
3 A McGrath
2 M Redman
1 B Hobbs
As stated before the season, 6 (SIX) votes must be divided amongst 3 (THREE) distinct players, in whole numbers, no halves, who played for the Essendon AFL team in the game in question.
If this condition isn’t met, the whole vote is ignored.
4 Likes
Do you really need to allocate all 6? I certainly understand that you can’t give more than 3 votes for any one player, but if you only think one player was worth a vote, why can’t you just vote for that one player, with one, two or three votes as you think fit?
3 McGrath
2 Hobbs
1 Redman
Do it right, or don’t do it at all.
Apart from that, my spreadsheet keeps running totals of each 3, 2 or 1 vote so i know if i get it all out of whack and miss a chunk (which happens regularly). Fairly tired of all the stupid sets of votes I’ve had.
3 Likes
3 McGrath
2 Redman
1 Martin
Redman
McGrath
Hobbs
Redman
McGrath
Bzt
I reckon it was for both dissent and hanging on to the ball.
3 McGrath
2 Redman
1 Martin
3 Mc Grath
2 Hobbs
1 Langford
3 Mc Grath
2 Heppell
1 Redmond
3 Redman
2 McGrath
1 Hobbs
Reckon this will be the smallest spread of players getting votes that we’ve seen for a while.
Yeah, nah.
But i’ll check when i get home.
Whoever gets the 1 vote will have had a lot more mentions than even some games this year.
Last week, Stringer was 5th with 5 votes.
But last week had an inordinately low number of voters, presumably due to Monday’s outage.
You don’t get extra votes to apportion in a 100 pt win. And you don’t get to leave some out in a bad loss.
It’s simply your ranking (not rating) of Essendon’s three best players on the day.