Minor irritation

[disgruntled goat]

THIS is a petty complaint on its own, but refers to something larger.

We've all got tales to tell of the anti-Swans bias in a lot of football commentary (Dwayne Russell, Danny Frawley, Robert Walls, Stephen Quartermain, et al) and media reporting, and this is just another example of it ... but I'd love to know how Greg Baum, a very experienced and respected footy journalist at The Age, came up with his "best" votes yesterday.

Baum gave Goodes and Mumford his top two spots, both 7 out of 10, but his next three in order, all on scores of 6, were Marc Murphy, Malceski and Chris Judd.

Somehow, he saw Murphy and Judd as being better than every other Sydney player. That, to me, is blatant pandering to his Victorian readership and does his overall credibility no good at all. I could easily find another half-dozen Swans I thought were better than both those Carlton players. Judd, in particular, was very disappointing by his standards in the first half (and overall), and his disposal was heckin'g rubbish.

I know Sydney is a fairly even side across the board, no real superstars, and that's largely what the team's success has been based on for 6-7 years. We rarely have players featuring in the media awards, particularly the Victoria media, but this sort of example is what infuriates me about the wider AFL community.

As a comparison, the Dogs beat Port by 36 points on Saturday night (we beat a better opponent in more convincing style, by a bigger margin), yet all five players in Emma Quayle's best were Dogs, four on 8 and one on 7.

As the thread says, it's a minor irritation, but I'm sitting at work with fck-all to do for an hour or so and I wanted to get this off my chest.

 

[Benevolent Ert]

Most journalists would struggle to name more than 5 Swans players off the top of their heads.

The commentators can't even tell who is who half the time.

 

[disgruntled goat]

Most journalists would struggle to name more than 5 Swans players off the top of their heads.

The commentators can't even tell who is who half the time.

Sighhh ... tis true.

 

[Dangas]

Murphy? That is a joke, did he play?

 

[disgruntled goat]

I've just read Baum's match report, and checked the stats panel attributed to Baum that runs next to the report, and Baum did not include Judd in his six best Carlton players, who were Murphy, Russell, Hampson, Scotland, Carrazzo and Garlett.

Curioser and curioser ...

 

[grimlock]

I was also taken aback when I saw that this morning. He certainly didn't look very good on TV. However his stats do look very impressive - 9 clearances (game high) and 18 contested possessions (game high). I do wonder if that influenced Baum's votes.

FWIW, Judd received one vote in the coaches' votes, and the only Carlton player to do so. Based solely on what Roos said in his press conference, I would put my money on Roos awarding that vote instead of Ratten

 

[J_Moore]

What are Baum's votes like in a game where one Melbourne club monsters another Melbourne club? Does he always try and include both sides?

 

[bungee]

Damn you Bateman. You wrote something I agree with.

 

[bedford]

Baum even had McVeigh in the Swans best, now before everyone starts having a go at me, be honest there was no way known he was in our best. Baum is normally a good journo, who goes against the establishment eg. his total dislike of the Formula 1 circus that wastes over $50 million every year.

 

[SOPH_CROSS]

Im pretty sure Russell said the LEORY jetta had been kicking a few goals for the swans ressies

i just want 2 scream at them

 

[smasher]

I did read in the HS that we had five players who scored over 100 points in their DT.Thats a fair effort and I haven't checked but I think we would also have had a few thereabouts.

 

[No1SwansFan]

Im pretty sure Russell said the LEORY jetta had been kicking a few goals for the swans ressies

i just want 2 scream at them

Yes Soph he did.

 

[Swans120]

For Murphy to be considered one of the best 5 players on the ground is just absurd. Judd i can forgive because he was doing the work of about 5 Carlton midfielders (though his disposal was very ordinary) but Murphy being there makes me think exactly what Mr PB said about the Vic papers pandering to their Vic readers and bugger the non-Vic teams.

 

[Dangas]

Dream Team points don't take into account the effectiveness of their possessions

 

[BarneyBent]

Judd is understandable, he worked his arse off with a very hard tag on him, he was given absolutely no room to move, and his teammates gave him very little support, so it would have been a superhuman effort for him to get any fluency into his game. His efforts to win those clearances and possessions were vintage Judd, he just had no opportunity to add the polish on top, due to the efforts of Jack and the lack of effort from his teammates. It was a fantastic battle between he and Jack, in which they split the honours, and both played very, very well indeed.

Murphy, on the other hand, is bewildering.

 

[bedford]

I hope you are kidding, Judd was smashed by swans everytime he got the ball. The only time he was clear was when he got the gift goal in the first quarter.

 

[BarneyBent]

I hope you are kidding, Judd was smashed by swans everytime he got the ball. The only time he was clear was when he got the gift goal in the first quarter.

Yes, he was smashed by the Swans every time he got the ball, and yes, he did struggle to get clear. That's exactly what I was saying. That is credit to the Swans, it doesn't take away from the supreme efforts Judd was putting in. He worked his arse off in close and did as much as he could, while Jack did as much as he could do limit his impact.

 

[bungee]

Agree. Judd was in top form but couldn't do much carrying 21 other blokes in Blue and our own Jack on his back. He's wasted playing for Carlton.

 

[bedford]

Judd had no affect on the game, same as he didn't in 05 when he got the Norm Smith by default.

 

[Tedeski]

Most journalists would struggle to name more than 5 Swans players off the top of their heads.

The commentators can't even tell who is who half the time.

Was Jesse Smith in any of the voting?

 

[disgruntled goat]

Judd had no affect on the game, same as he didn't in 05 when he got the Norm Smith by default.

This, I think, is at the core of my issue. Judd was awarded the Norm Smith as a token gesture to the team beaten in a close game by Sydney. I would bet my knob that had a Victorian team won that GF, the Norm Smith would've gone to a member of that team.

Judd then, and now, has very questionable disposal by foot under constant pressure.

Yes, he worked hard the other day, but he had an impact only in the second half when his team was well and truly beaten (despite Dwayne and Danny's opinions), and the Swans were all but treading water.

 

[bedford]

Roos to this day believes Leo should have got it and LRT, Fosdike and Monty all had more influence on the GF than Judd.

 

[BarneyBent]

Judd had no affect on the game, same as he didn't in 05 when he got the Norm Smith by default.

Yes, he wasn't BOG. But he was very, very good. The reason he didn't have an effect wasn't his fault, it was that Jack was on his hammer every single time, his teammates never made use of the fantastic, hard clearance work that he put in (meaning it all came to nothing), and that nobody else stepped in and tried to shovel the ball out to him for a change. Judd is wasted playing purely as an inside mid, but he was the only one capable of doing it. Definitely deserves plaudits for the game.

He and Jack cancelled each other out by both playing very, very well.

 

[Banyo Bloods]

This is barely worth a mention from the original post but I've always found Danny Frawley to be quite complimentary to the Swans.

 

[liz]

Yes, he wasn't BOG. But he was very, very good. The reason he didn't have an affect wasn't his fault, it was that Jack was on his hammer every single time, his teammates never made use of the fantastic, hard clearance work that he put in (meaning it all came to nothing), and that nobody else stepped in and tried to shovel the ball out to him for a change. Judd is wasted playing purely as an inside mid, but he was the only one capable of doing it. Definitely deserves plaudits for the game.

He and Jack cancelled each other out by both playing very, very well.

Does that mean that if Jesse White doesn't touch the ball against Geelong in 10 days time because Scarlett is on his hammer everytime the ball comes close, but White works really hard, White will deserve votes?

I realise Judd did get his hands on the ball a reasonable bit in the second half, but still created little and had close to no impact on the result of the game. Doesn't mean Judd should be slated for his game but to suggest he was in the best 5 players is odd.