Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 57

Thread: Brownlow Thread (2021)

  1. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Blood Fever View Post
    LOL.. Werribee a long way from Footscray. Melbourne geography lesson needed.
    You may be right, but I do believe the smell lingers in footscray on the prevailing westerly breeze.

    Anyway, who is this "footscray"?, I thought they were the team of Melbourne western suburbs. The fine cities of...
    City of Brimbank
    City of Hobsons Bay
    City of Maribyrnong
    City of Moonee Valley
    City of Melton
    City of Wyndham

    and Werribee is in wyndham.

  2. #38
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    8,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Blood Fever View Post
    LOL.. Werribee a long way from Footscray. Melbourne geography lesson needed.
    There's no doubt that Footscray's crap ends up there....and somewhere in that same putrid mess lies the 2016 Premiership Cup.....tainted and smelly.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    You may be right, but I do believe the smell lingers in footscray on the prevailing westerly breeze.

    Anyway, who is this "footscray"?, I thought they were the team of Melbourne western suburbs. The fine cities of...
    City of Brimbank
    City of Hobsons Bay
    City of Maribyrnong
    City of Moonee Valley
    City of Melton
    City of Wyndham

    and Werribee is in wyndham.
    That's reaching....it's still a long way from Footscray.

  3. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    You may be right, but I do believe the smell lingers in footscray on the prevailing westerly breeze.

    Anyway, who is this "footscray"?, I thought they were the team of Melbourne western suburbs. The fine cities of...
    City of Brimbank
    City of Hobsons Bay
    City of Maribyrnong
    City of Moonee Valley
    City of Melton
    City of Wyndham

    and Werribee is in wyndham.
    They're trying to claim Ballarat now too, with the connivance of the Ballarat Council (and, I might add, the AFL).
    Last edited by Bloods05; 20th September 2021 at 04:35 PM. Reason: added comment

  4. #40
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    8,177
    One thing for me which stuck out from the count was Touk Miller's 18 votes after a stellar season which I thought would lead to an embarrassing win to a suspended player. I believe the umpires may have ignored him after he became ineligible......which I thought they are not supposed to do. More HQ influence/directives on AFL umpiring perhaps??

  5. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by stevoswan View Post
    One thing for me which stuck out from the count was Touk Miller's 18 votes after a stellar season which I thought would lead to an embarrassing win to a suspended player. I believe the umpires may have ignored him after he became ineligible......which I thought they are not supposed to do. More HQ influence/directives on AFL umpiring perhaps??
    The brownlow has changed so much over the years. Back in the day, you thought players were a better chance if they played for a weaker team (ie, you'd stand out), and fullfowards (plugger) and spare men in defence (woewodin) could win it. Now its just a possession count for midfielders.

    Umpires!, reclaim your medal from the stats counters!

  6. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    The brownlow has changed so much over the years. Back in the day, you thought players were a better chance if they played for a weaker team (ie, you'd stand out), and fullfowards (plugger) and spare men in defence (woewodin) could win it. Now its just a possession count for midfielders.

    Umpires!, reclaim your medal from the stats counters!
    It's true that non-midfielders won it more frequently in the past, and that it wasn't so rare for a player in a team outside the top four, but I'm pretty certain Plugger was the only permanent full-forward ever to win it. Bernie Quinlan played a lot at full-forward, but not exclusively.

  7. #43
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,095
    Quote Originally Posted by SCGonasunnyday View Post
    Can’t believe dom sheed polled 1 vote in the game where we won by 92. Seems suss
    I couldn't believe it either. I was certain it would be 3 swans.

  8. #44
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Meg View Post
    And if Mills didn’t go to the rugby game he wouldn’t have spent 14 days in a hotel room, and if he didn’t spend 14 days in a hotel room his Achilles injury might not have flared up, and if his Achilles hadn’t flared up he would have played in the EF, and if Mills had played in the EF .......

    Lol. have to be content with his 14 Brownlow votes ....
    Meg I've thought this exact same thing a number of times since the Elimination Final loss ☹.

  9. #45
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,095
    Quote Originally Posted by i'm-uninformed2 View Post
    It was silly, but I didn't mind - it meant the Bont got so agonisingly close, only to see it snatched away.

    An exact replica of what I hope happens Saturday night and I wanna see up close shots of the heart break on the face of him and his team mates.
    I was glad he didn't win. I don't know what others thought but to me he looked pissed that he missed out.

  10. #46
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloods05 View Post
    It's true that non-midfielders won it more frequently in the past, and that it wasn't so rare for a player in a team outside the top four, but I'm pretty certain Plugger was the only permanent full-forward ever to win it. Bernie Quinlan played a lot at full-forward, but not exclusively.
    I never saw him play (before my time) but a certain ex-CEO of the Swans is a one time Brownlow medalist and a two time Coleman medalist. Since I've heard it oft quoted that Lockett was the first (and only) full-forward to win the Brownlow, I presume he was a CHF. But his Coleman medal winning goal tallies would put most current full forwards to shame. (Yes, different era.)

  11. #47
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    Quote Originally Posted by stevoswan View Post
    One thing for me which stuck out from the count was Touk Miller's 18 votes after a stellar season which I thought would lead to an embarrassing win to a suspended player. I believe the umpires may have ignored him after he became ineligible......which I thought they are not supposed to do. More HQ influence/directives on AFL umpiring perhaps??
    I suspect it reflects that the Suns had a lousy second half of the season - again. He still polled by far the most votes for the Suns, more than twice Anderson in second place. And polled only one vote in the first six rounds, meaning the bulk of the votes he did get came after his round 8 suspension. You have to have had an outstanding game to poll more than the odd vote here and there when your team is regularly being beaten.

  12. #48
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    Quote Originally Posted by NeonBible View Post
    Hi Liz,

    I thought about this too, and came to a reasonable conclusion I hope.

    The disparity between a midfielders dominant games and quiet games is a lot less than say a key forward or a defender or a small forward.

    A midfielder who averages 30 possessions like Macrae or Wines could have a "quiet game" by their standards and only get 20-25. That could still be enough to net them a vote here and there. But a forward needs to regularly get a bag of goals to poll consistent votes, because 4.1 looks very different to 1.1.
    I guess the midfielders - particularly the best few from each side - rarely have "quiet games" because their role is to get to lots of contests, and to flick the ball around a lot while they make up their mind what to do with it. But, despite what commentators would sometimes have you believe, a midfielder touching the ball 30 times, rather than 25, doesn't mean they've actually had more impact on the game. Not on its own. It depends what they do with it. And how they win it in the first place.

    When Ablett (jnr) was in his prime, the commentators used to drool over him getting 30, sometimes 40 possessions a game. But what made him great was that, with about a dozen or so of those possessions, he split the game open, did things other players weren't capable of. Clearly, the more times a player gets the ball, the more chances he has to do something special with it, but it's that ability, not merely the accumulation of meaningless touches, that makes the best player great.

    I don't have an issue with the winners list being dominated by midfielders. I just find it a bit sad that they are collecting such a high proportion of the votes. It used to be that you could win the Brownlow with barely 20 votes. Nowadays you don't stand a chance unless you score 30+. And some of those votes you'll have "won" without actually doing much special, but just because the umpires checked the stats at the end of the game and saw you touched it a lot.

    When I think back to our game against Port, the first thing I remember is Charlie Dixon tearing us apart. And then Hewett keeping Boak very quiet in the first half, but Boak coming out after half-time and dominating the midfield, after our lads had done a very good job in the first half. The Brownlow votes were 3 Boak; 2 Franklin; 1 Wines. Franklin had a pretty good game (he kicked four goals) but Dixon was better. And a couple of our midfielders had better games than Wines. Arguably than Boak too, if you count both halves, though Boak's second half was worthy of recognition. I went and checked the AFLCA votes for the game and they bear out my recollection. Dixon scored 10 votes, Parker 8. Boak and Franklin featured in the minor votes, Wines did not.

    Clearly that's just one game, and one where Wines just scored 1 point. So it's not comprehensive. But it does seem to suggest that maybe the umpires are swayed unduly by stats. (Eg Dixon only kicked two goals himself, to Franklin's four, but was the more dominant forward that game.)

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO