Both had 28 and Cripps got 2, Steele 1 in a game saints won ( umps chose him over Steele just because..... bit like Cripps winning MVP by 300+ because when in doubt give Cripps and Fyfe a vote for playing well). Anyway votes are just opinions. Umps couldn’t ignore Neales 50 in last round, media salivated over Dusty and the umps gave him nothing.Watched the Brownlow with a Saints fan who remembers that when the Saints played Carlton Jack Steele kept Cripps to twenty touches while getting 25 himself. Yet he got the 3 votes, extraordinary.
It’s fascinating that back in 1924, the powers that be decided to entrust the highest award to the umpires not the coaches. I suppose they felt the umpires were closest to the action and saw the “unfair” actions the coaches couldn’t see or care about. It was probably easier back then with the slower speed and openness easier to observe. I find it even more fascinating that it took until this century before the coaches were given the opportunity to voice their opinions on who the best player of the season. Would be interesting to know why.It’s as if, after some games, the umps (no doubt exhausted from all the running, shouting and whistling) when handed the voting paper, fill in the name of someone they know who generally plays well, or who stood out once or twice for some specific reason. Ah well.
And people, it’s “Fyfe didn’t have that good a season “, not “good of a season”.
Umps vote as play unfolds. Coaches take a broader view. Coaches voted Bont as best. Fyfe is a serious gun though. Both awards are a legit fair call.
Agree 100 per cent. Call me crazy but if your team gets hammered or loses enough games to get your coach sacked, there’s no way you should have 33 votes by Round 21.I'll never give up on the thought that the 3 should be reserved for the winning team if the game is won by more than 4 goals, unless there are extremely exceptional circumstances. I still remember Ablett polling 3 in a +90pt loss to Coll while at the Suns. Surely there is one player in the winning 22 who is more deserving of 3 votes in those cases.
Scott West was good at it. Paticularly in 2003 when we were bottom and only fell behind Goodes.Agree 100 per cent. Call me crazy but if your team gets hammered or loses enough games to get your coach sacked, there’s no way you should have 33 votes by Round 21.
Too many umpires with stars in their eyes. Surely if you’re an umpire you have to ask yourself who had the biggest influence on the outcome of the game? That’s the player who should get 3.
If a side is beaten maybe a player gets 1 or 2, but 3s by players in beaten and thrashed sides should be very rare.
Nice to see the umps have discovered who Macrae is after 2016! One vote???2019:
Biggs (NF) 1
Biggs (NF) 3
M. Boyd 2
I think our "bubble" was only beaten by GeelongBubble of excellence 59 votes versus whole teams:
Bubble 59 defeated Sydney 53
Bubble 59 defeated St Kilda 53
Bubble 59 defeated Melbourne 47
Bubble 59 defeated Gold Coast 22
Bubble 59 defeated Essendon 58
Bubble 59 defeated Adelaide 53
The Bubble Of Excellence is real:
Macrae: 22 Votes, in 12 Games, for 9 Wins.
Bontempelli: 22 Votes, in 9 Games, for 6 Wins
Dunkley: 15 Votes, in 6 Games, for 6 Wins
Dunkley joined the bubble late,
Which was quite a sin,
For once he joined the bubble,
All we could do was win.
(Except when we lost of course)
Macrae voted in 12 GamesComment Absurd
I'm aching now - had to do the hardest thing ever and hand over $20 to a former umpire because Cripps polled more than Bont….
I'm calling collusion - he still speaks to the other umps. 4 measly votes and Cripps got all those s**t votes in losing games...I have had some very earnest discussion around how umps cast their votes in games today..its a rort
Maybe I don't watch enough Cripps because I don't think he has that much influence on a game - agree on his disposal I just hate the losing teams getting the 3 votes. The ump I spoke to said as much - if they aren't sure who to vote for, they go safe and pick a name player, that's why its become a midfielders medal
Marcus Bontempelli: 127 Games, 91 Goal Assists.
Geelong's effort was more surprising - 24 and 27 votes to their top 2. Have 2 players from the one club ever racked up 50+ votes in a season before?*With 22 votes apiece, Macrae and Bontempelli have established a new record for two teammates polling the same amount of Brownlow votes on the one night. The previous record was 19 each by Jonathon Brown and Simon Black for Brisbane Lions in 2009.
Happened a few times recently.Geelong's effort was more surprising - 24 and 27 votes to their top 2. Have 2 players from the one club ever racked up 50+ votes in a season before?*
*Obviously apart from the two years in the 1970s when they awarded double the number of votes (3-2-1 from each of 2 central umpires).
Bont - 21 ( Macrae 22)
Cripps - 6
Bont - 7 pg
Cripps - 5 pg
Bont - 123
Cripps- 62 ( probably because he handballs so much)
Bont - 139
Cripps - 170
What Cripps is rightly praised for but this amounts to 2 more than Bont per game. Not a big diff.
Cripps - 340/225
I like Bonts balance better. Good in the contest but more uncontested means more freedom to go inside 50 and be more directly involved in assists and involvements. Cripps fans praise him for being a contested beast but doing so much contributes to a lot of handballs.
Cripps - 212/348
Prefer to see Bont kick for impact than Cripps shovel it out to someone not as good as him
Bont - 68%
Cripps - 73%
Bont takes risks with kicks. Cripps has more effective handballs that hit target over shorter distance
Bont- 15.27 (42 scores)
Cripps- 13.6 (19 scores)
Bonts biggest flaw but 42 shots ( not counting complete misses) is a positive that can be fixed. Cripps has set a goal to score more.
Time on ground
Cripps is needed on ground more and in the midfield more.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk