MVP Round 16 ; Essendon Vs Power

[I Remember Bluey]

3- Merrett
2- Hobbs
1- Caldwell

 

[I Remember Bluey]

Coaches Votes V Power

10 Dan Houston (PORT)
5 Connor Rozee (PORT)
4 Kane Farrell (PORT)
4 Jye Caldwell (ESS)
4 Zach Merrett (ESS)
3 Andrew Phillips (ESS)

 

[Lore]

Coaches Votes V Power

10 Dan Houston (PORT)
5 Connor Rozee (PORT)
4 Kane Farrell (PORT)
4 Jye Caldwell (ESS)
4 Zach Merrett (ESS)
3 Andrew Phillips (ESS)

Oh interesting. I think there are two ways it works;

Option 1:
5-5 Houston
3-2 Rozee
4-0 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
0-4 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
1-3 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
2-1 Phillips

Fair difference of opinion there.

Coach 1: Houston - 4 voter - Rozee - Phillips - 4 voter (1 vote)
Coach 2: Houston - 4 voter - 4 voter (3 votes) - Rozee - Phillips

Option 2:
5-5 Houston
4-1 Rozee
1-3 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
2-2 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
0-4 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
3-0 Phillips

Coach 1: Houston - Rozee - Phillips - 4 voter (2 votes) - 4 voter (1 vote)
Coach 2: Houston - 4 voter - 4 voter (3 votes) - 4 voter (2 votes) - Rozee

In this case I'd guess Option 2 is the more likely combination, as it means the better players on the night are getting votes from both coaches.

Also reckon Coach 1 is Scott, while Coach 2 is Hinkley.

Scott would therefore have given his 2 votes to Merrett and 1 vote to Caldwell. He is more likely to see the game as we do; the damage Rozee was doing in the middle was noticeable in how he impacted on our players, and Scott would be more likely to credit Phillips' solo-work in the ruck (who looked quite happy in the post-match interview for the club website, despite losing).

That leaves Hinkley giving Farrell 4 votes, Caldwell 3 votes and Merrett 2 votes, which also makes sense given that Farrell wasn't that interesting from the outside looking in unless you know what you asked him to do, and Rozee probably does what he did last weekend every week so might not be as valued by his coach (especially if he knows he can do even better).

 

[eth-dog]

Oh interesting. I think there are two ways it works;

Option 1:
5-5 Houston
3-2 Rozee
4-0 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
0-4 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
1-3 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
2-1 Phillips

Fair difference of opinion there.

Coach 1: Houston - 4 voter - Rozee - Phillips - 4 voter (1 vote)
Coach 2: Houston - 4 voter - 4 voter (3 votes) - Rozee - Phillips

Option 2:
5-5 Houston
4-1 Rozee
1-3 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
2-2 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
0-4 Merrett/Farrell/Caldwell
3-0 Phillips

Coach 1: Houston - Rozee - Phillips - 4 voter (2 votes) - 4 voter (1 vote)
Coach 2: Houston - 4 voter - 4 voter (3 votes) - 4 voter (2 votes) - Rozee

In this case I'd guess Option 2 is the more likely combination, as it means the better players on the night are getting votes from both coaches.

Also reckon Coach 1 is Scott, while Coach 2 is Hinkley.

Scott would therefore have given his 2 votes to Merrett and 1 vote to Caldwell. He is more likely to see the game as we do; the damage Rozee was doing in the middle was noticeable in how he impacted on our players, and Scott would be more likely to credit Phillips' solo-work in the ruck (who looked quite happy in the post-match interview for the club website, despite losing).

That leaves Hinkley giving Farrell 4 votes, Caldwell 3 votes and Merrett 2 votes, which also makes sense given that Farrell wasn't that interesting from the outside looking in unless you know what you asked him to do, and Rozee probably does what he did last weekend every week so might not be as valued by his coach (especially if he knows he can do even better).

Farrell tore us to shreds?

 

[gunit_]

3 Merrett
2 Phillips
1 Caldwell