PM, I was as shocked as anyone when RL fessed up to giving Gaff 4 votes in the Coach's Award - particularly as I had been scathing of Simpson for giving him votes after that dog act as I thought there's no way RL would have.
Once my shock wore off I went and had a look at the stats.
Gaff had 33 disposals (equal 1st), 12 contested possessions (equal 4th), 7 i50's (1st), 4 clearances (equal 5th), 3 marks, 3 tackles and kicked a goal. His impact (pardon the pun) after his king hit on Brayshaw (early in the third, remember) was minimal and I would rate his influence on the contest up to that point to be at least as high as Yeo's. That is, he was one of the main reasons we were so far behind on the scoreboard (read: getting flogged) to that point.
Obviously the Coach's Award is not a 'fairest & best' thing so coaches need to be objective about their voting and on that basis, Roly's decision makes sense. What doesn't make sense is Simpson not giving Gaff a single vote. Once again, I believe Ross has shown up the Weagles to be petty tossers who haven't even got the stone's to back their own bloke in - king hit or not.
I understand, and to a point accept, a lot of the criticism that comes Lyon's way for his coaching. But on this particular occasion he has shown remarkable restraint (both during the game and after in the post-game media conference - even with pissed, Weak Coast 'corporates' booing him), refused to buy into Meth Coast attempts to incite a snippy response to claims Freo 'inflamed' the situation through RL's post-game comments and generally took the high moral ground over those muppets as they drowned in their own filth.
If the ABR faction would like to take off their anti-rose-coloured glasses for a moment - you'll see what I've said makes sense.
