leaguelegend21
Juniors
- Messages
- 563
It's clear by now that Andrew Fifita was the best player in the 2016 NRL Grand Final. Regardless of his off field shenanigans, he was the best player throughout the 80 minutes that matters most. Not only did he come up with many crucial runs and bone crunching tackles, he scored the most important try in the history of the Cronulla based Sharks.
By now, everyone knows that the decision makers at League Central didn't give Andy Fifita the top gong because of his unsavoury off-field exploits. The possibility of Fifita blurting out comments in support of his criminal friends was too much for NRL officials to risk. To deny Fifita of such an award, officials must have been scared of him saying something awfully damaging to the code. In my opinion, this snub sets a dangerous precedence for the league. To judge a player in the grand final based upon factors extraneous to performance goes against the very nature of the award. There is no doubting Fifita has problems off the field - for these missteps he deserves the appropriate action. However, during those 80 minutes he was undeniably the key figure for the winning team.
In the past, numerous league bad boys have won the award - Willie Mason, Darius Boyd and Andrew Johns to name a few. If these colourful figures were awarded the top gong, what makes Fifita so different? What could he possibly have said in front of the huge audience that would have been so damaging to the code? What disaster would have ensured from him being named the best player in the biggest game of the year?
By now, everyone knows that the decision makers at League Central didn't give Andy Fifita the top gong because of his unsavoury off-field exploits. The possibility of Fifita blurting out comments in support of his criminal friends was too much for NRL officials to risk. To deny Fifita of such an award, officials must have been scared of him saying something awfully damaging to the code. In my opinion, this snub sets a dangerous precedence for the league. To judge a player in the grand final based upon factors extraneous to performance goes against the very nature of the award. There is no doubting Fifita has problems off the field - for these missteps he deserves the appropriate action. However, during those 80 minutes he was undeniably the key figure for the winning team.
In the past, numerous league bad boys have won the award - Willie Mason, Darius Boyd and Andrew Johns to name a few. If these colourful figures were awarded the top gong, what makes Fifita so different? What could he possibly have said in front of the huge audience that would have been so damaging to the code? What disaster would have ensured from him being named the best player in the biggest game of the year?
