Brownlow WTF's?

[And_ROOS]

Also thought I. Omith was stiff in a couple of games. Should have polled far better...

I think for a bloke not on an AFL list he polled quite well

 

[Mosca]

Hawks (104), West Coast (93) and Carlton (92) polling more votes than Geelong (91) seems a bit strange

This post wins. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Chinners100]

Was surprised that Chamberlain didnt award himself the 3 votes in the fremantle @ sydney game.

Pretty terrible how Kelly only managed 6 votes and how Cox managed only 18.

 

[SCARD]

Brownlow votes must be taken out of the hands of the umpires.

 

[scaryness]

Round 1 Geelong vs St Kilda

most people would have said that Bartel was BOG and Hayes and Enright were 2 and 1. Instead we get Dal Santo, Wojcinski and Riewoldt.

 

[mediumsizered]

Hawks (104), West Coast (93) and Carlton (92) polling more votes than Geelong (91) seems a bit strange

A couple of factors probably come into play here. Geelong won 5 of their H&A games by 2 goals or less, making it easier to award votes to opposition players in these games. Also, the lack of a standout player this season (Geelong's success has come about due to the evenness of their list this season) probably made it easier for the umpires to look at opposition players.

 

[BLUES9898]

Pendlebury getting the 2 where he was beaten by Gibbs and Blair getting the 1 where he was the difference And Lewis getting none where he should of got 3 votes and juddy getting the one against north I loled at this part though when richo said to boomers wife if your pregnat when she's not

 

[Heisenberg_]

Brett Deledio getting BoG medal in round 2 and no votes in the brownlow for that round.

Worst miss of the night, I know a lot of umpires a missing a bit upstairs, but surely when they were doing the votes they would have thought of the bloke that was awarded the medal for BOG

 

[Doormat Flying]

Everything in this thread is about who was best on ground or who wasn't in particular games, but the Brownlow is for "fairest and best", not "best". I have no idea how the umpires take that into account but to say someone was dudded when they were clearly BOG and didn't get 3 votes is missing half the story. Barry Hall as an example tended to give away a lot of frees and often remonstrated with the umpires if he didn't get one himself, so maybe the umps took that into account when working out the votes.

 

[ARRunner]

i've come to think the umpires simply get the top 3 players from each team, write their names on a piece of paper, chuck them in a hat, ruffle it around a bit and then pull them out in corresponding order of the votes.

In all honestly though, its a midfielders medal for a reason. Sure you need a good defense to hold the side together, but you can't win games with a rubbish midfield.

 

[big_e]

Brownlow votes must be taken out of the hands of the umpires.

How many times does it need to be said? There are plenty of other awards available for other people to win.

 

[Lasso]

Biggest WTF was Round 5 Freo vs Dogs, Mundy and Boyd both completely dominant with 74 posessions, 9 marks, 2 goals, 14 tackles, 13 inside 50's between them........1 brownlow vote....Bradley gets 4 goals a couple of them Joe the goose handballs....3 votes.....WTF

Its cos it was a good game for kepler, so it stands out. Silly i know. He also probably celebrated like he kicked 10 so that helps lol

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

I remember watching that game, Stevie J was a monster. I thought for sure he'd get atleast 1-2 votes. Absolutely laughable that he was snubbed.

What really stood out to me, while Judd was very good last year, i thought he had a MUCH better season this year. Gets 7 less votes though

I reckon this has more to do with Carlton actually winning more games and having a more even spread of good players than last year. From memory you finished 7thish last year, with Judd a clear standout. This year you finished 5th, winning 16 games??, and having guys like Robinson, Scotland, Murphy, etc etc doing very well for you.

Surely Demetriou stuffing up Isaac Smith's name is one of the larger WTF's. The fact that he paused, said it as I Omith, paused again seemingly thinking he'd cocked up then just kept going was quite humerous.

Also, Bruce at the end with Dane Swan. cringeworthy interview at times, probably not helped by Swan who seemed to just want to get off the stage, but some of his questions were just silly and the constant touching of his arm was creepy

 

[Pie eyed]

People just have to realise the Brownlow is what it is.
If it was taken away from the umps, there would be even more margin for "suspect" decision making if not outright corruption and favoritism.
Who do we trust with these decisions, who could remain totally objective,in all instances, who witnesses the game at closer quarters?

We all acknowledge that umpires make decisions, throughout the game and throughout the year that polarize opinion so it has to be accepted that any "award" adjudicated by them will be equally open to interpretation.

The fact is if you change the Brownlow voting criteria it ceases to be the Brownlow.
We already have two alternate awards.

The fact that the Brownlow still holds the position as the highest personal award in the general football psyche is evidence that the vast majority are not overly put off by the sometimes unexpected, sometimes highly debatable results.

When a player refuses the award on principal, I'll agree it should go, but I never think that will happen.

Until that day it is what it is and it's not really for us to condemn as it is not our award and we have no control over it's outcome.

 

[Big Blood]

It's got so that the league needs the WAGS on the blue carpet to lend Brownlow night some credibility.

 

[Hoops]

edit: made a mistake

 

[Conan Troutman]

A couple of factors probably come into play here. Geelong won 5 of their H&A games by 2 goals or less, making it easier to award votes to opposition players in these games. Also, the lack of a standout player this season (Geelong's success has come about due to the evenness of their list this season) probably made it easier for the umpires to look at opposition players.

Yeah if you add in their 3 losses too, Geelong played in 9 games decided by 13 points or lower (won 6, lost 3) and of those 9 games, Geelong got the 3 votes once.

[u]Round	W/L	Margin	3 Votes[/u]
01	Win 	 1 	Dal Santo
[COLOR="DarkRed"]02	Win 	11 	S.Johnson[/COLOR]
08	Win 	 3 	Swan
09	Win 	 2 	Scotland
12	Win 	 5 	Mitchell
15	Loss 	 4 	Melksham
16	Loss 	 8 	Priddis
21	Win 	11 	Sloane
23	Loss 	13 	Goodes

So yeah I think you are right - I'm guessing those games will be where the difference in totals comes from. Not that I'm suggesting that is wrong of course (being the team I support) - if the votes are deserved, I couldn't care less who the winner or loser is.

If you look who got the votes too, they are mostly players who had very good seasons. Whether they were good in those particular games, I don't remember to be honest, but I assume they must have been.

 

[SA HAWK]

Jordan Lewis no votes in RD 22 v Carlton.

Clearly best on ground.

 

[lamaros]

Umpires voting based on expectations explains Geelong I think. If you're expected to win easily and you don't then the umpires look at the other side and think "gee, they must have played well".

Notice how often the team that wins an upset will get all 6 votes, while the favoured team has to truly dominate to get all 6.

 

[Barnzy]

Stephen Hill getting a vote in a game in which he collected 10 disposals in.

 

[Liam Boy]

Here's a few for North, in chronological order:

1. Round 8: Daniel Wells not polling against Melbourne. He was quite easily best on ground and everyone I talked to at the time agreed with me.

2. Round 9: Jonathan Brown getting 3 votes. Luke Delaney did a very good job covering him in his debut, and his six goals would look about half as impressive if he hadn't been given those two free kicks and 50.

3. Round 12: Brent Harvey not polling against Gold Coast. Had a great game and was very influential. Deserved at least 1 vote.

4. Round 13: Brady Rawlings getting the 3 votes when Brent Harvey won the medal for best on ground. I'm convinced the umpires had a look at the stats, no way would Brady have gotten the votes otherwise. In addition, Daniel Wells not polling. he was easily North Melbourne's best, I said at the time he deserved the medal more than Brent Harvey did.

5. Round 17: Andrew Swallow not polling. Sure, he was one of the 3 dominant North Melbourne midfielders for the whole game (The other two being Ziebell and Wells) but considering they got votes, why shouldn't he? Sure, Drew Petrie played a good game but Spitter was just ahead of him.

6. Round 19: Chris Judd polling. Levi Greenwood and Ben Cunnington should've gotten votes for the great tagging job they did on him, he was Shithouse. I jumped up and screamed at my television.

7. Round 20: Scott McMahon not polling. He was our best player with 30 Disposals and almost won the game. The umpires have probably never heard of him. Good reliable, honest players like him never get the kind of attention flashy exciting types do.

 

[tek87]

Nic Nat not getting a vote against the crows in round 24. He put on a clinic in his ruckwork yet an underplayed Cox got a vote. WTF!

 

[RegHickeyStand]

111 Collingwood
107 Hawthorn
93 West Coast
92 Carlton
85 Geelong
79 Sydney
74 St Kilda
66 North Melbourne
60 Essendon
58 Western Bulldogs
57 Melbourne
49 Richmond
49 Fremantle
41 Brisbane
39 Adelaide
38 Gold Coast
24 Port Adelaide

 

[Molian]

111 Collingwood (1)
107 Hawthorn (3)
93 West Coast (4)
92 Carlton (5)
91 Geelong (2)
79 Sydney (7)
74 St Kilda (6)
66 North Melbourne (9)
60 Essendon (8)
58 Western Bulldogs (10)
57 Melbourne (13)
49 Richmond (12)
49 Fremantle (11)
39 Adelaide (14)
38 Brisbane (15)
38 Gold Coast (17)
24 Port Adelaide (16)

Was about to post that too.
Bolded the ones i had different and added ladder position too.
Only real big mover was Geelong which i think lamaros covered as to why they moved so far down.

 

[mediumsizered]

6. Round 19: Chris Judd polling. Levi Greenwood and Ben Cunnington should've gotten votes for the great tagging job they did on him, he was Shithouse. I jumped up and screamed at my television.

25 disposals, 5 marks, 4 tackles, 4 I50s, 1 goal. Not a bad day's work for someone who was apparently so well tagged.