Jim Park Award 2026 February 13, 2026, 01:27:21 pm With the season coming ever closer, it is time mull over what we want to do with our B&F award.I expect to have the time to deal with it again this year, so that isn't a problem. But I do wish to consider what we do with it, considering that we appear to be having fewer and fewer voters:[1] Do we want the same format that we've had?Personally, I like it, as it gives me an opportunity to award everyone who needs a mention, that just the best one of two. However, it is complicated (for some).[2] If we don't want to continue as it has been, what changes should we make? Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #1 – February 13, 2026, 01:51:36 pm [1] 15 votes in total, no more, no less.[2] No more than 10 votes for any one player (even Sam Walsh or Patrick Cripps)[3] Three players at least must get a mention.I find the format above, which has been in place for a while, to be somewhat restrictive. I'd like to be able to vote for an unlimited number of players for starters. We can see that this is a felt issue from a number of voters, because they often give HM or honorable mentions to players they can't fit into the format, which IMO is a backdoor way of giving them votes. I'd also like restriction number 3 removed. Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #2 – February 13, 2026, 03:07:57 pm I have stuck with a 5,4,3,2,1 voting system for a few years now but I often find that I have two or three players vying for the last vote.I'm happy to keep going as is but, if a change is needed, how about adopting the John Nicholls Medal voting system or similar. That is:A maximum of 20 votes per game. The votes awarded are shared among a maximum of eight players.Voters don't have to award all of their votes.The maximum votes any one player may receive is 10.That system would put the kybosh on your preference to award votes to lots of players Crash but perhaps we could go to voting for a maximum of 10 players.The extremes would be one or two players with 10 votes, 10 players with two votes each, one player with one vote, or no votes at all for a shocking loss. Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #3 – February 13, 2026, 03:28:11 pm I can't see any reason to change, every system has a strength and weakness, and the grass is not always greener on the other side. Quote Selected 1 Likes
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #4 – February 13, 2026, 03:32:09 pm I'll do whatever you want Crash. Probably the one thread I enjoy the most Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #5 – February 13, 2026, 06:41:48 pm Quote from: rocky – on February 13, 2026, 03:32:09 pmI'll do whatever you want Crash. Probably the one thread I enjoy the mostx 2 Crash Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #6 – February 18, 2026, 06:05:09 pm I am happy with it as is Crash. No need to change unless you want to. Quote Selected 1 Likes
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #7 – February 19, 2026, 05:12:03 am Very appreciative of your efforts. Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #8 – February 19, 2026, 07:53:29 am I wouldn't change the format, Capt Crash. It's a format unique to this forum and is working well.Huge appreciation to you for your efforts. Quote Selected 1 Likes
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #9 – February 19, 2026, 10:15:06 am It looks like most people would prefer to keep things as they are. Fair enough. I can do that.Voting will appear as normal. Quote Selected 4 Likes
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #10 – March 11, 2026, 11:35:58 am AFL 2026 Rd 0: Carlton vs SydneyThe first 2.4 quarters were good, but after that, it wasn't fun. Trends:[1] There were 16 voters this round, which is the best we've had in over a year. A sign of things to come? Hopefully, we can keep these numbers up! Please do voteplease do vote, win, lose or draw: it is something we appreciate and it makes our statistics a lot more reliable. And our statistics hold up pretty well when it comes to John Nicholls Medal night![2] The rating was a 6.40, which represents a E+, shows how disappointed the voters were. Not the way we wanted to start the season.[3] 15 players managed a mention this week, which isn't that bad. These days, we often get 16+ for a decent win, but it does show that we were more than competitive for much of the game.[4] The average vote this week was 21, which again shows the dissatisfaction with the result and the effort in the 3rd term. [5] 3 players managed 100 votes or more this week. [6] Sam Walsh was BOG this round with 292 votes, followed by Marc Pittonet with 214 and Jagga Smith with 106. Considering the Pitto was actually beaten in the ruck, it sort of tells the tale. Excellent to see Jagga make an impression in his debut.[7] Two player managed votes from everyone this week, Walsh and Pittonet. Jagga Smith missed from 1 voter.[8] It was our youngsters who made probably the most important contribution this week, as our midfield mainstays generally had a poor game. Jagga came in 3rd, while Harry Dean came in 7th. Cooper Lord also made a contribution.Our experienced mids, like Cripps and Hewett, didn't have great games, and we missed their drive. [9] This was a round where only Sam Walsh really stood out for 4 quarters. Others were good for periods, but no one aspect of our team could be considered clear winners.Votes:Walsh, Sam 292Pittonet, Marc 214Smith, Jagga 106Lord, Cooper 90 Weitering, Jacob 56William, Zac 52Dean, Harry 38Ainsworth, Ben 34Florent, Oliver 22Hollands, Oliver 22Hollands, Elijah 10Kemp, Brodie 10Hewett, George 8Cripps, Patrick 4Young, Lewis 2Progressive Voting:Walsh, Sam 292Pittonet, Marc 214Smith, Jagga 106Lord, Cooper 90 Weitering, Jacob 56William, Zac 52Dean, Harry 38Ainsworth, Ben 34Florent, Oliver 22Hollands, Oliver 22Hollands, Elijah 10Kemp, Brodie 10Hewett, George 8Cripps, Patrick 4Young, Lewis 2 Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #11 – March 11, 2026, 12:25:50 pm Quote from: crashlander – on March 11, 2026, 11:35:58 amAFL 2026 Rd 0: Carlton vs SydneyThe first 2.4 quarters were good, but after that, it wasn't fun. Trends:[1] There were 16 voters this round, which is the best we've had in over a year. A sign of things to come? Hopefully, we can keep these numbers up! Please do voteplease do vote, win, lose or draw: it is something we appreciate and it makes our statistics a lot more reliable. And our statistics hold up pretty well when it comes to John Nicholls Medal night![2] The rating was a 6.40, which represents a E+, shows how disappointed the voters were. Not the way we wanted to start the season.[3] 15 players managed a mention this week, which isn't that bad. These days, we often get 16+ for a decent win, but it does show that we were more than competitive for much of the game.[4] The average vote this week was 21, which again shows the dissatisfaction with the result and the effort in the 3rd term. [5] 3 players managed 100 votes or more this week. [6] Sam Walsh was BOG this round with 292 votes, followed by Marc Pittonet with 214 and Jagga Smith with 106. Considering the Pitto was actually beaten in the ruck, it sort of tells the tale. Excellent to see Jagga make an impression in his debut.[7] Two player managed votes from everyone this week, Walsh and Pittonet. Jagga Smith missed from 1 voter.[8] It was our youngsters who made probably the most important contribution this week, as our midfield mainstays generally had a poor game. Jagga came in 3rd, while Harry Dean came in 7th. Cooper Lord also made a contribution.Our experienced mids, like Cripps and Hewett, didn't have great games, and we missed their drive. [9] This was a round where only Sam Walsh really stood out for 4 quarters. Others were good for periods, but no one aspect of our team could be considered clear winners.Votes:Walsh, Sam 292Pittonet, Marc 214Smith, Jagga 106Lord, Cooper 90 Weitering, Jacob 56William, Zac 52Dean, Harry 38Ainsworth, Ben 34Florent, Oliver 22Hollands, Oliver 22Hollands, Elijah 10Kemp, Brodie 10Hewett, George 8Cripps, Patrick 4Young, Lewis 2Progressive Voting:Walsh, Sam 292Pittonet, Marc 214Smith, Jagga 106Lord, Cooper 90 Weitering, Jacob 56William, Zac 52Dean, Harry 38Ainsworth, Ben 34Florent, Oliver 22Hollands, Oliver 22Hollands, Elijah 10Kemp, Brodie 10Hewett, George 8Cripps, Patrick 4Young, Lewis 2Mucho Apreciados for your work, Capt Crash. Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #12 – March 11, 2026, 02:09:57 pm Quote from: Baggers – on March 11, 2026, 12:25:50 pmQuote from: crashlander – on March 11, 2026, 11:35:58 amAFL 2026 Rd 0: Carlton vs SydneyThe first 2.4 quarters were good, but after that, it wasn't fun. Trends:[1] There were 16 voters this round, which is the best we've had in over a year. A sign of things to come? Hopefully, we can keep these numbers up! Please do voteplease do vote, win, lose or draw: it is something we appreciate and it makes our statistics a lot more reliable. And our statistics hold up pretty well when it comes to John Nicholls Medal night![2] The rating was a 6.40, which represents a E+, shows how disappointed the voters were. Not the way we wanted to start the season.[3] 15 players managed a mention this week, which isn't that bad. These days, we often get 16+ for a decent win, but it does show that we were more than competitive for much of the game.[4] The average vote this week was 21, which again shows the dissatisfaction with the result and the effort in the 3rd term. [5] 3 players managed 100 votes or more this week. [6] Sam Walsh was BOG this round with 292 votes, followed by Marc Pittonet with 214 and Jagga Smith with 106. Considering the Pitto was actually beaten in the ruck, it sort of tells the tale. Excellent to see Jagga make an impression in his debut.[7] Two player managed votes from everyone this week, Walsh and Pittonet. Jagga Smith missed from 1 voter.[8] It was our youngsters who made probably the most important contribution this week, as our midfield mainstays generally had a poor game. Jagga came in 3rd, while Harry Dean came in 7th. Cooper Lord also made a contribution.Our experienced mids, like Cripps and Hewett, didn't have great games, and we missed their drive. [9] This was a round where only Sam Walsh really stood out for 4 quarters. Others were good for periods, but no one aspect of our team could be considered clear winners.Votes:Walsh, Sam 292Pittonet, Marc 214Smith, Jagga 106Lord, Cooper 90 Weitering, Jacob 56William, Zac 52Dean, Harry 38Ainsworth, Ben 34Florent, Oliver 22Hollands, Oliver 22Hollands, Elijah 10Kemp, Brodie 10Hewett, George 8Cripps, Patrick 4Young, Lewis 2Progressive Voting:Walsh, Sam 292Pittonet, Marc 214Smith, Jagga 106Lord, Cooper 90 Weitering, Jacob 56William, Zac 52Dean, Harry 38Ainsworth, Ben 34Florent, Oliver 22Hollands, Oliver 22Hollands, Elijah 10Kemp, Brodie 10Hewett, George 8Cripps, Patrick 4Young, Lewis 2Mucho Apreciados for your work, Capt Crash. No worries. But it was nice having more voters. So, please, keep voting! Hopefully the senior will make voting more of a pleasure than a pain! Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #13 – Today at 10:42:54 am AFL 2026 Rd 1: Carlton vs RichmondWe won, but we kicking 1 goal after half time was problematic.Trends:[1] There were 15 voters this round, after a similar showing in the previous round. This is much better than we managed last year. Please do voteplease do vote, win, lose or draw: it is something we appreciate and it makes our statistics a lot more reliable. And our statistics hold up pretty well when it comes to John Nicholls Medal night![2] The rating was a 7.69, which represents a C-, is a considerable improvement after last week, but still something that needs improving.[3] 13 players managed a mention this week, two less than last week. These days, we often get 16+ for a decent win, but this wasn't a decent win.[4] The average vote this week was 25, which again shows significant dissatisfaction with the result and the effort after half time. [5] 3 players managed 100 votes or more this week. This is the same as last week, but the totals suggest our better players were more effective.[6] Jagga Smith was BOG this round with 254 votes; congratulations, youngster! He was followed by Sam Walsh with 233 and Patrick Cripps with 187. [7] One player managed votes from everyone this week, Jagga Smith. Walsh missed from 1 voter, while Cripps missed from 2.[8] The distribution of votes this week suggested that we had a more rounded performance across the board, rather than only getting something from the youngsters. Our mids were particularly strong, with 3 of them being the best 3 players on the ground. [9] Looking at the youngsters, Jagga Smith stood out. Matt Carroll was also significant. Votes:Smith, Jagga 254Walsh, Sam 233Cripps, Patrick 187Pittonet, Marc 92Weitering, Jacob 77Carroll, Matthew 69William, Zac 56Lord, Cooper 54Hewett, George 44McGovern, Mitchell 36Florent, Oliver 31McKay, Harrison 13Hayward, Will 8Progressive Voting:Walsh, Sam 526Smith, Jagga 360Pittonet, Marc 307Patrick Cripps 192Lord, Cooper 144 Weitering, Jacob 133William, Zac 109Matthew Carroll 70Florent, Oliver 53Hewett, George 52Dean, Harry 38Mitch McGovern 36Ainsworth, Ben 34Hollands, Oliver 22Harry McKay 13Hollands, Elijah 10Kemp, Brodie 10Will Hayward 8Young, Lewis 2Sam Walsh is the early leader, ahead of Jagga Smith. Pitto in 3rd says something. Quote Selected
Re: Jim Park Award 2026 Reply #14 – Today at 01:42:58 pm Quote from: crashlander – on Today at 10:42:54 am Pitto in 3rd says something.I wonder if TDK is 3rd in the saints count at this stage?Or even in the top 10! Quote Selected
Topic: Jim Park Award 2026 (Read 3401 times)
previous topic - next topic
Topic: Jim Park Award 2026 (Read 3401 times)
previous topic - next topic