Autopsy I did it - The Round 14 JHF 3 Brownlow Votes Highlights

[Sultanpepper]

I think this was the game Bergman played on Cameron and had him in his pocket all game, the only goal he kicked was while Bergman was on the bench. So unless they thought that jhf was putting in a defensive masterclass from the midfield I would put it down simply to incompetence from the umps


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[WillHayward]

When faced with cause being a conspiracy (corruption in this case) or just unplanned incompetence, I'll always favour the latter

Usually I agree with this sentiment but at the same time we can't ignore how endemic gambling is to the game (thanks to Gillon and his mates) and that we know for a fact that gambling interests impact on sports results.

So it's not that far fetched a conspiracy.

I mean just look at the gambling advertising we are bombarded with constantly.

 

[Spiral_Out]

You are an absolute champion. Seeing Margetts and Gil defend this sort of BS is exactly why everyone sees the AFL as a 'boy's club.' Not an independent thought amongst their braindead fraternity.

Would love if you could do the same for the Lachie Neale game when you get a chance.

Thanks but nah, I did this because someone requested it, I had time and was curious, it took a few hours.


I think this is more than enough to help people see what I already knew.


I was entertained, it was funny because as I was doing it, it truly was insane and I knew that when I posted the video there would still be people defend the AFL, defend the umpires and laugh off any possibility of conspiracy.

 

[jdeezy]

You Port guys are absolutely delusional.
He isn't even the best player in his team and is far from the best in the comp.

I think he is already behind Ashcroft and well behind Daicos.

He will be similar to Wines, a good above average player.

Why don't we just wait and see them? Who knows, maybe young Daicos has peaked in year 2. Like if you told me at the end of his second year that Wingard would eventually end up a bit of a plodder at Hawthorn there's no way I would've believed you. Pretty sure none of us can predict the future.

Except for the fact that JHF will be the best player in the comp for the next 20 years, and do it whilst carrying the burden of having a dumb dumb as coach. That one is predictable, because it's obviously true.

 

[Senor Ed]

A lot of perfect people on this website. Humans make mistakes.

Sure, but 4 umps all making the same mistake?

 

[TheEscapeClub]

Gee it’s hard to defend this one, though.

A rugby league equivalent tomorrow night at the Dally Ms would be a front rower having 6 runs for 40 metres, 12 tackles, 0 tackle breaks, two knock-ons, two penalties conceded and half a dozen missed tackles, no offloads, no line breaks or line break assists, and banking best on ground.

A good game would be 14 runs, 150 metres gained, 8 tackle breaks, 35 tackles, 2 missed, 0 dropped balls and 0 penalties conceded, 3 offloads, a line break.

That’s not a mistake, that’s an out and out attempt to corrupt the process or a sign that umpires shouldn’t be relied on to give an assessment if they are capable of being THAT far off the mark

Less players, much smaller field, slower and non 360 game. Much easier job.

 

[SSwans2011]

I think this was the game Bergman played on Cameron and had him in his pocket all game, the only goal he kicked was while Bergman was on the bench. So unless they thought that jhf was putting in a defensive masterclass from the midfield I would put it down simply to incompetence from the umps


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah my first thought watching the highlights was "bet the umps got him mixed up with Bergman".

Hilarious anyway.

 

[PhatBoy]

Less players, much smaller field, slower and non 360 game. Much easier job.

There are 4 of them doing it, though.

Either way the point wasn’t the system it was the bizarre statistical anomaly that it represented

 

[Gavin Excell]

Is it true that they don't have access to the stats?

They were talking about this on Footy Classified last night. I think it's only been from this year

 

[TheEscapeClub]

There are 4 of them doing it, though.

Either way the point wasn’t the system it was the bizarre statistical anomaly that it represented

Having 4 probably complicates it more than just having one, unless of course the touchies are allowed to contribute.

My point wasn't the system either, my point was that it's probably easier to identify the better players in an NRL game due to the factors I listed.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Unbelievable.
I reckon the odds still would have been decent enough. Maybe 50:1?

No that's a maximum payout of $250
So if he's 50-1 the maximum bet they could accept is $5

 

[My Tilly]

No that's a maximum payout of $250
So if he's 50-1 the maximum bet they could accept is $5

Oh, my mistake. Makes sense as I thought maximum stake of $250 which would be ridiculous if that is considered 'pulled back' by the AFL.

 

[Belnakor]

Yeah my first thought watching the highlights was "bet the umps got him mixed up with Bergman".

Hilarious anyway.

also the stats wouldn't have fixed this, they clearly got them mixed up and thought JHF gave Cameron a bath. Bergman's stats weren't any better.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

That has to be in contention for the worst 3 vote game in the history of the sport.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

I just looked up the stats for that game and Bergman got six disposals so even if there was a mix up surely that doesn’t explain how they thought Horne-Francis was best on ground.

It could. If they got them confused and thought every time one of them got the ball that it was the same person...
"Gee I reckon that bloke's had it around 20 times and been all over the ground"
They also tend to use player's names when setting the free kicks and the marks, etc. I noticed with one of the frees, the ump just said a few times 'it's Port Adelaide's kick' as if he couldn't remember his name.

The fact that he had 4 frees for and 4 frees against possibly puts him in the umpire's spotlight a lot too.
Umpires aren't watching to see who plays well. They're watching to find infringements and pay free kicks. That's why they tend to gravitate towards giving votes to players who are in the thick of the action getting clearances and contested possessions. That's when the umps are paying close attention to the action.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Found this interesting

 

[mouncey2franklin]

They were talking about this on Footy Classified last night. I think it's only been from this year

I'm skeptical.

 

[Rod Stroker]

Imagine being labelled a lazy turncoat with a bad attitude by North supporters having had no pre season and still topping any North players in the Brownlow.

Thats the real scandal.

Imagine blowing your top draft picks on a mid who gets 13 touches a game, which has now ruled you out from bringing in a 2 time AA ruckman who might actually be able to take you somewhere.

 

[Shane Heard]

I'm skeptical.

So am I. Because even without seeing post game stats they still predominantly vote mids in the top 3.

Doesn’t explain Andrew Phillips’ 3 though.

 

[Shane Heard]

He didn't rig the votes, he allegedly told his buddies who was getting the votes.

That’s how it’s usually done.

 

[ferrisb]

The wildest thing about it to me is the constant whinging and mouthing off to umpires. Players who do that normally can't get a vote even if they have 40 and kick goals.

Greg Williams, is that you?

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

No that's a maximum payout of $250
So if he's 50-1 the maximum bet they could accept is $5

It's actually the betting agencies who would make bank in this scenario. Especially with a capped payout.
If a favourite gets the 3 votes, they're probably paying out around 80% of the pot. When a roughy gets up like JHF, they probably bank more like 95% of the pot.
They're making money either way, but they'd make more money from roughies winning.

 

[Tandy]

I don't know how the group of umpires could make a mistake this badly. Surely there's a please explain from the AFL. Or the umpire boss to find out how the group came to the conclusion that such a poor game results in 3 votes. If they combined Bergman and JHF it's still not worthy of a vote. Was it laziness? If it's true and this is the first year they haven't been able to look at stats then the process needs to change. Also have no issue with Neale winning.

 

[sobrave]

Now do the game Phillips got 3 votes.

And the one english got 3 votes while getting destroyed by Ned Reeves.

 

[Clark G]

Now do the game Phillips got 3 votes.

And the one english got 3 votes while getting destroyed by Ned Reeves.

Phillips was very good in that game, him and Draper destroyed Grundy. The puzzling part is how Draper missed a vote.