- Sep 18, 2014
- 22,648
- 20,845
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Man United, San Antonio Spurs
I can't be the only one that has watched the last 3 minutes of Saturday's prelim 10+ times?
Yes yes, Geelong lost and it made your year we get it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I can't be the only one that has watched the last 3 minutes of Saturday's prelim 10+ times?
Umpires: S, Wonder. R, Charles, A, Bocelli.
PFs or better under Scott: 8Yes yes, Geelong lost and it made your year we get it.
Well there is 1 more game than there used to be so that helps.Cripps is a deserving winner, but 45 votes is insanity. Even N. Daicos polling more than any previous winner shows how inflated the votes have become.
Ablett 2010:Cripps is a deserving winner, but 45 votes is insanity. Even N. Daicos polling more than any previous winner shows how inflated the votes have become.
Harrison Petty got 3 for 1 goal and 14.i think sam berry getting 3 votes vs the dogs for 14 touches should be reason enough to take the voting off the umps.
Bont had some exceptional games but was average in a lot. Those exceptional games still only get 3 votes.Cripps is a super player and no issue with him winning it, but the overall count was a joke. The concentration of votes at the top end is unreal. Wouldn’t be surprised if part of the blowback means Cripps polls much worse no matter how he plays next year.
Given it’s a midfielders medal does Bont spend 95% of the game abusing the umps. Not sure how else to explain how he ends up so far behind the others.
So do we have a problem where the profile of the midfield players is so high that the umpires are subconsciously voting for them and feeding into a feedback loop where we go "well such and such got this many brownlow votes therefore he good at football" and then he gets more votes the next year and so on.
Umpires when they watch it back and complain about the umpiring:I reckon part of the issue is having the umps vote without seeing any footage of the game or looking at stats. Obviously stats don't tell the whole story but if you think a bloke is worth 2 votes but he only had 19 touches at 14% efficiency then you need to be informed that your opinion is just plain wrong.
Personally I think they should do an initial 3-2-1 then be made to sit there and watch a replay of the game before doing a second 3-2-1 and seeing if it matches up.
The award has always been rubbish, I don't even bother watching it most years.
They can talk? Surely occupied tending to Patrick...
Tigers fans still whinge about that nothing incident with Vlastuin in the GF.