The Dominator 3
Draftee
The system is full of inequalities. The Morrish medal, from a players point of view, put simply, is just an honourable acknowledgement of a year filled with consistency. The award, in all seriousness, means nothing compared to the ultimate achievement - getting on an AFL list at seasons end - which is of greater importance.
We seem to be over analysing a small part of the competition. A weighting system would seem to bridge this talent disparity but however Anton Woods winning that award doesn't influence a recruiters opinion of him at all. At the end of the day, Ben Cunnington will definitely get drafted, whereas Woods, may perhaps be overlooked. I don't think Cunnington is disappointed eh?
The voting system and process isn't bulletproof, but it is entirely subjective which is the essence of equality. The scaling or weighting system would only be used in predicting potential outcomes. For example, with the results mentioned above, had Cunnington played more games than he did, he may have won the award. It is not a measurement of worthiness or distinction, but a means to solve a hypothetical.
Mike Hussey, using a similar measurement, was almost statistically as brilliant as Don Bradman earlier in this career but I don't think Hussey is good enough to wash the Don's laundry. Such methods do not reflect true individual brilliance. It is a given that someone would rather play in a national carnival and jeopardise their chance of winning a some what insignificant individual accolade (although this is not the argument).
The extension of the national carnival ripples into other competitions as well. It takes away sometimes more than one player from teams for a five - six week period and in the context of school football, where seasons are only 10 weeks in duration, are astronomical in deciding premierships and individual awards come seasons end. These are inevitable bi-products of the national carnival and will not be changed. Maybe a players MVP award should be introduced where peer respectability will always triumph over the opinions of an umpire. This award, in my opinion, is the only means in recognising the 'best' players in the competition.
We seem to be over analysing a small part of the competition. A weighting system would seem to bridge this talent disparity but however Anton Woods winning that award doesn't influence a recruiters opinion of him at all. At the end of the day, Ben Cunnington will definitely get drafted, whereas Woods, may perhaps be overlooked. I don't think Cunnington is disappointed eh?
The voting system and process isn't bulletproof, but it is entirely subjective which is the essence of equality. The scaling or weighting system would only be used in predicting potential outcomes. For example, with the results mentioned above, had Cunnington played more games than he did, he may have won the award. It is not a measurement of worthiness or distinction, but a means to solve a hypothetical.
Mike Hussey, using a similar measurement, was almost statistically as brilliant as Don Bradman earlier in this career but I don't think Hussey is good enough to wash the Don's laundry. Such methods do not reflect true individual brilliance. It is a given that someone would rather play in a national carnival and jeopardise their chance of winning a some what insignificant individual accolade (although this is not the argument).
The extension of the national carnival ripples into other competitions as well. It takes away sometimes more than one player from teams for a five - six week period and in the context of school football, where seasons are only 10 weeks in duration, are astronomical in deciding premierships and individual awards come seasons end. These are inevitable bi-products of the national carnival and will not be changed. Maybe a players MVP award should be introduced where peer respectability will always triumph over the opinions of an umpire. This award, in my opinion, is the only means in recognising the 'best' players in the competition.
