Brownlow = Midfield Medal?

[John Who]

Looking through the stats over the past 25 years, the Brownlow medallists have all been won by midfielders. With the exception to this rule being Adam Goodes in 2006, who had a dual ruck/midfielder role. I believe with the ever-increasing professionalism in the sport of AFL, there is more money and science influencing player's training to the "elite standards". It is commonplace now to see midfielders regularly racking up 30+ possessions, doing more chasing and tackling. So really, it's not hard to understand why midfielders get the most notice by the Umpires, simply because they cover more ground in more space, and more often!

With the above intro in mind, are we really judging the Brownlow as the "Best and Fairest"? or is it merely a reflection of "who is the best midfielder?" Here are some further questions maybe worthwhile to discuss further:

1. Is this being fair to the Forwards or Defenders who can play their role equally as effective to that of a midfielder, but might not get the recognition they deserve because a stat does not get registered to their name?

2. Should the umpires be the ones to judge the best players on the day?

3. Should we add another Medal awarded to the best Forward/Defender?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Sandra Sully with the late news on that title. Been a midfielders award for ages.

 

[kane249]

Sandra Sully with the late news on that title. Been a midfielders award for ages.

I was going to say in other news the earth is round, but there's a massive thread on the conspiracy board that has this up for discussion.

 

[John Who]

Sandra Sully with the late news on that title. Been a midfielders award for ages.

I didn't see any Sandra Sully news, when was it shown?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I was going to say in other news the earth is round, but there's a massive thread on the conspiracy board that has this up for discussion.

Van_Dyke learnt the hard way today.
NEVER again say "in other news water is wet"

 

[Underarm]

All awards are biased towards midfielders. Everyone values them as better than the rest.

 

[theyellowsash]

Thing is, the coaches and players all vote the same way. The coaches would be the best judge of who impacted the game the best.

I think it comes down to the facts that 1) there are simply significantly more midfielders than kpps so it's more likely they will have the best player, 2) brownlow winning midfielders are typically extremely consistent. Martin averages 30 possies and well over a goal a game. Forwards and backwards might play games that deserve brownlow votes, but in the end it's too hard for them to play enough outstanding games to win because the difficulty of their positions make them inconsistent

 

[Percel]

I completely disagree this is a midfielders medal.

The statistics do not support it.

Terrible thread, OP should be perma'd

 

[John Who]

Waiting in anticipation for some serious suggestions, rather than gold comedy..

 

[Tbonefreo]

Richo had a good point - barely got a vote and then moved into the midfield for a year and nearly won the bloody thing

 

[King Brown]

I was going to say in other news the earth is round, but there's a massive thread on the conspiracy board that has this up for discussion.

There’s a massive thread on the conspiracy board that disputes the Brownlow is a midfielder’s medal?

The lunatics!

 

[kane249]

There’s a massive thread on the conspiracy board that disputes the Brownlow is a midfielder’s medal?

The lunatics!

Something something Jesuits something something lizard peoples medal

 

[Ron The Bear]

When Norm Ware won in 1941, criticism was directed at the award's domination by ruckmen. This year Jacobs polled 10 votes and the next best ruckman had 6.

Yeah it's a midfielder's medal at the moment, but the game will continue to change.

 

[Wallaby]

Sky = Blue???

 

[Teen Wolf]

Looking through the stats over the past 25 years, the Brownlow medallists have all been won by midfielders. With the exception to this rule being Adam Goodes in 2006, who had a dual ruck/midfielder role.

More like 2003, his ruck duties were significantly reduced after that season. Appropriately named on the wing in the '06 AA team.

I believe with the ever-increasing professionalism in the sport of AFL, there is more money and science influencing player's training to the "elite standards". It is commonplace now to see midfielders regularly racking up 30+ possessions, doing more chasing and tackling.

Ah no, they handball more, nothing to do with professionalism and science. If anything, high levels of chasing and tackling would mean a decrease in possessions (but of course it doesn't, because most "pressure acts" are usually just as frivolous as most disposals these days).

With the above intro in mind, are we really judging the Brownlow as the "Best and Fairest"? or is it merely a reflection of "who is the best midfielder?"

You'd be closer to the mark if you exchanged "midfielder" with "ball magnet". Otherwise, Scott Pendlebury would have a Brownlow to his name.

2. Should the umpires be the ones to judge the best players on the day?
3. Should we add another Medal awarded to the best Forward/Defender?

This year's best forward was awarded the Coleman Medal, and this year's best defender was awarded the AA captaincy. It's not like the top non-midfielders are so starved of accolades that we need to make up a few more patronising feel-good trophies.

Name a forward or defender who should have won a Brownlow in the last 10-15 years. Lance Franklin? Possibly. Pavlich/Riewoldt/Brown/Tredrea close but not close enough, in my opinion, and absolutely no credible candidates in the last 5 years. It's not like the '90s anymore when monstrous forwards were winning matches off their own boot and still getting snubbed by the umpires. Today they're more likely to give votes to the right players, even if it is for the wrong reasons.

As I alluded to earlier, I do agree that the umpires erroneously reward the modern inclination to overuse the footy, but generally they are on the right track because my conservative estimate is that 12 of the best 15 players are midfielders.

 

[John Who]

More like 2003, his ruck duties were significantly reduced after that season. Appropriately named on the wing in the '06 AA team.


Ah no, they handball more, nothing to do with professionalism and science. If anything, high levels of chasing and tackling would mean a decrease in possessions (but of course it doesn't, because most "pressure acts" are usually just as frivolous as most disposals these days).


You'd be closer to the mark if you exchanged "midfielder" with "ball magnet". Otherwise, Scott Pendlebury would have a Brownlow to his name.


This year's best forward was awarded the Coleman Medal, and this year's best defender was awarded the AA captaincy. It's not like the top non-midfielders are so starved of accolades that we need to make up a few more patronising feel-good trophies.

Name a forward or defender who should have won a Brownlow in the last 10-15 years. Lance Franklin? Possibly. Pavlich/Riewoldt/Brown/Tredrea close but not close enough, in my opinion, and absolutely no credible candidates in the last 5 years. It's not like the '90s anymore when monstrous forwards were winning matches off their own boot and still getting snubbed by the umpires. Today they're more likely to give votes to the right players, even if it is for the wrong reasons.

As I alluded to earlier, I do agree that the umpires erroneously reward the modern inclination to overuse the footy, but generally they are on the right track because my conservative estimate is that 12 of the best 15 players are midfielders.

Kudos for your attempts to dismantle my initial OP intro. Nice change of pace from all the outrageous humor and snappy responses.

You call it "ball magnet", and I call it "midfielder". The point is though, these are still the players that start around the mid-zones and run both ways so they get the most notice by all 3 umpires from each zones (attack, midfield and defense). Further to counter your argument, if the Umps were deciding on the best ball magnet, then Tom Mitchell or Matt Crouch should have won the medal this year. So really best "midfielder" is still befitting of the Brownlow theme.

I agree to your thoughtful last paragraph. The modern era no longer is reliant on one big full forward, so they become less "eye-catchy" to the Umps. Defenders are even less noticeable because a spoil does not register as a possession (when it might actually be just as important).

Just picture this, if the Brownlow is judged more evenly across all the zones, then wouldn't that mean it becomes less predictable and more enthralling to watch?

 

[Sttew]

All awards are biased towards midfielders. Everyone values them as better than the rest.

Coleman Medal?

 

[Brutalitops]

Got damn midfielders! Dey took our jerbs!

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

I've come round to the view that midfielders win the medal because midfielders are more important to results of games than other positions.

The team which wins the clearances and inside 50s usually wins the game, so the player responsible for your team dominating those statistical categories on a given day is usually the best on ground.

It takes an absolutely freakish effort from a forward or back to turn a game when the opposition midfield is on top.

 

[Underarm]

Coleman Medal?

Yes, apart from that one. Unique from the rest because there is no judging to be done.

 

[Coaster2012]

Wow what a bombshell.

 

[demondavey]

Waiting in anticipation for some serious suggestions, rather than gold comedy..

The thing with football is it's all about entertainment. It's also all about the players that are well covered in the media and are popular. Football is about scoring and looking good doing it, so an attacking midfielder is always going to get the votes when it's up for grabs. Forwards have to kick a bag to get noticed, and even though you could argue Rance is just as important as Martin, he will never get votes because he plays a role that isn't sexy.

 

[RupieDupie]

Young Plugger got up to take one with the Rat, but back in those days forwards frequently kicked 10 goals a game.

I think there should be some "inverse" stats to give the defenders and taggers a bit more of a chance. Calculate the average disposals / scores of a player (expected possessions) and subtract the amount of actual possessions + how many possessions the player gets during a game. Thus a player is adjudicated, not only on what they did, but what they prevented from happening.

For example, player on Lance Franklin, ave goals ~3 for 2017. If Franklin kicks 0, the player gets 3 goals.

 

[Ari]

It's obviously a midfielders medal and it's been this way for a while. I think what the OP is trying to say is at what point do we stop calling it the 'best and fairest' and start calling it the best midfielder of the year? It seems a fair way to do it. Having KPP's come in and basically be ineligible for the medal because they're not under the umpires noses kinda bites. And likewise, having midfielders feel like they're competing with the rest of the competition is a bit silly as well, they're not.

It has been and will always be the midfielders medal. I've had money on Richo and Buddy in my younger days, poor mans mistake.

 

[Connor2779]

Midfielders win the Brownlow
Forwards win the Coleman
Defenders win Best Clubman at B & F's