Was Chris Judd a deserving winner?

[Bic]

Well deserved winner.

His odds on winning was a steal for anyone with any knowledge on the game. Got me a good wad of cash

He had a much better season personally than Swan, IMO. Goes to show hard work around packs is greater than handballs and kick to kick in the back pocket, and he doesn't go missing when the team is struggling.

This medal was for the real footy player

 

[Lukesta63]

Simply Yay or Nay.

Either way, not overly fussed.

Couple of games IMV were confusing in terms of votes.

Rd 22.
Judd - 1 vote. Stephen Hill - 0 votes. As a neutral, I personally thought it was Sandilands then Hill for influence on the game.
Rd 6.
Judd - 3 votes. 6 clangers. 53 points loss.
Rd 13.
Judd clearly beaten by Adam McPhee. 2 Brownlow votes. Sandilands 1.

On top of that, he escaped suspension.

Have a look at his stats for the game esp. Clearances and CP's You're only shitty because it was a Carlton player,dont forget Swan came 3rd,dont see you moaning about Ablett!!

 

[The Panther]

Have a look at his stats for the game esp. Clearances and CP's

Why are clearances king?

Does it really matter if Player X, let's say C Judd, gets a clearance & it directly goes to a Player from Team Y, let's say Collingwood?

Collingwood scored 13 goals from direct Carlton turnovers. Judd contributed 6 of these.

This is from a neutral supporter, "Northboy", on the North forum..

I watched the Collingwood v Carlton game. There should be an investigation into those votes.

Not only was he not even close to BOG (they lost by 9 goals, from memory) he was downright shit for most of it. Collingwood rotated blokes off him who for those 10 minute bursts were their best players. Defensively he was laughable. He torched the footy. Makes no ****ing sense

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Why are clearances king?

Does it really matter if Player X, let's say C Judd, gets a clearance & it directly goes to a Player from Team Y, let's say Collingwood?

Collingwood scored 13 goals from direct Carlton turnovers. Judd contributed 6 of these.

This is from a neutral supporter, "Northboy", on the North forum..

If you take it off that game, he still has 27 votes and is still the winner.

Fact is, Had a good year, as did Swan and Ablett, he just had less players taking votes off him. Deserved winner, I'd say so.

 

[The Panther]

If you take it off that game, he still has 27 votes and is still the winner.

It's not that 1 game in isolation, that is an example of the "undeserved" votes Judd received.

Round 22 was a cracking game b/w Freo/Carlton. Sandilands was the clear BOG, no issue.

Stephen Hill was simply brillant that night, he was kicking goals, Carlton could not go with him. It was probably the best game I've seen by an 08' draftee ever.

He didn't receive 1 vote. Judd did.

 

[Pie_squasher]

Don't bother mentioning his 37 possessions or 11 clearances.

The only thing that could be more priceless than the look on Eddies face last night will be the look on his face when the Saints get up on Saturday.

In think this is something all (apart from the uncleaned) can agree on. Go those Sainters!!!!!!!!!!

 

[charcoalchicken]

Decent player but he def. didn't deserve it for how he went in 2010 he wasn't even in the top 10 players for this year

 

[LukeBallsGirl]

Overall, it is fun to make fun of him because he plays for Carlton, but the brownlow winner always has contentious votes that people wonder 'how about' and Judd is no different, because I remember Buckley getting votes against Sydney in 03 after having a pretty sub-par game and Goodes playing a blinder and getting none.

It happens. Judd's a great player. He had no competition from Carlton players for votes which to me shows he is alot like Buckley was at Collingwood, really relied on to pull the side through.

Would have him the winner over Boyd or Goodes.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Are you seriously trying to believe that Adam McPhee wasn't a direct opponent of Judd's when they met this year?

Given you think Gia is more creative than Pendlebury, it's pointless debating with your football knowledge..

well statistically he is more creative than pendles... hilarious!

sure McPhee was Judd's direct opponent, but it wasn't a head to head match up, surely you aren't suggesting that!!! The fact that his opponent, who he isn't assigned to stop had 12 less disposals than him is pretty ****ing good....

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

It's not that 1 game in isolation, that is an example of the "undeserved" votes Judd received.

Round 22 was a cracking game b/w Freo/Carlton. Sandilands was the clear BOG, no issue.

Stephen Hill was simply brillant that night, he was kicking goals, Carlton could not go with him. It was probably the best game I've seen by an 08' draftee ever.

He didn't receive 1 vote. Judd did.

thats the best you have??? fine Judd and Ablett tie for the brownlow big deal, Swan is still third, oh on he is in the top 3 performed players for the season as judged by the umpires thats terrible

 

[tigers_of_old_08]

Is the award terribly over-inflated? Definitely. The AFL still doesn't have a 'good' system for deciding the player of the year, the Brownlow is heavily favoured to midfielders, especially those that don't talk to umpires. The MVP is heavily favoured to whoever is leading the media awards. The media awards themselves tend to favour established players, and "stories" (ala Podsiadly, Barlow). Coaches award is probably the best of the lot, but even then there is often some 'interesting' votes.
quote]

Their choice in Judd was not based on "best & fairest behaviour towards umpires".

Hird found this out the hard way.

 

[cfx_1]

Sorry to butt in here guys. But in no way was Judd BOG in the game against the pies. I was laughing at how many times he directly or indirectly coughed up the ball. If it wasn't down the throat of a collingwood player it was to an unwinnable contest. He had 22 handballs that invariably went to team mates under direct pressure which forced more turnovers.

All this and the most telling stat.. In a game completely dominated by collingwood he had 1 tackle. 1 TACKLE. Unbeleivably and comprehensively the worst 37 disposal game I have ever seen. Not to mention that the scorline flatter carlton really. In a game where the pies kicked 155.

Having said that. There were stages this year Judd was fantastic. The only reason he polled so well this year is because Carlton have not one genuine A grader in the entire line up bar Judd who is A+. He turns it on for a quarter of footy, polls 3 votes and says "k thanks bye".... A causal result of this is also that he is the only one to get genuine attention - which might I add he usually beats, but quite often it results in poor disposals and decision making. Umpires regard this ability to beat a tag very highly and is probably why Swan didn't win it. The so called "untaggable" Swan did have a better year but regardless of whether he is untaggable or not, umpires aren't gonna give you the light of day if the opposition don't care.

 

[The Panther]

Sorry to butt in here guys. But in no way was Judd BOG in the game against the pies. I was laughing at how many times he directly or indirectly coughed up the ball.

Setanta had more dominance & influence for Carlton that day.

Wellingham, Ben Johnson & Beams were rotated off Judd that day. They directly kicked 6 goals.

He was a liability & contributed more to a Collingwood victory than any Carlton player that day.

 

[Bic]

Judd was easily the BOG that day. When a player has four opponents, and beats them with ease, doing his best work in a contested area, you are more than likely to get votes.

Look at Swan, kick to kick and handballs in the back pocket gets you nothing. Rightly so.

 

[The Panther]

When a player has four opponents, and beats them with ease.

When your opponents kick 6 goals on you & give up the disposals Judd did, your comment is as far from the truth as Carlton are off from winning a final.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

When your opponents kick 6 goals on you & give up the disposals Judd did, your comment is as far from the truth as Carlton are off from winning a final.

i love how you can't take off the rose coloured glasses for ANYTHING

 

[Andy_Mac]

Simply Yay or Nay.

Either way, not overly fussed.

Couple of games IMV were confusing in terms of votes.

Rd 22.
Judd - 1 vote. Stephen Hill - 0 votes. As a neutral, I personally thought it was Sandilands then Hill for influence on the game.
Rd 6.
Judd - 3 votes. 6 clangers. 53 points loss.
Rd 13.
Judd clearly beaten by Adam McPhee. 2 Brownlow votes. Sandilands 1.

On top of that, he escaped suspension.

Your're right. Ablett was robbed...

 

[Zahki]

i love how you can't take off the rose coloured glasses for ANYTHING

Generally if you directly contribute 6 goals to the opposition scoreboard you've had a bad game, even if you got a million disposals.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Generally if you directly contribute 6 goals to the opposition scoreboard you've had a bad game, even if you got a million disposals.

the thing is he didn't, there are is no statistic i can find in regards to turnovers which cost goals and just because his opponents kicked six goals in total (there were apparently 3) doesn't make Judd responsible, so of course they ONLY scored their goals while playing on Judd... but if not i can apply that logic and say they must have all had terrible games as their direct opponent got 37 touches... i remember that game and remember that Judd played particularly well

I wouldn't expect many collingwood supporters to acknowledge a carlton players performance, let alone one who beat their favorite in the Brownlow

 

[Partridge]

It's not that 1 game in isolation, that is an example of the "undeserved" votes Judd received.

Round 22 was a cracking game b/w Freo/Carlton. Sandilands was the clear BOG, no issue.

Stephen Hill was simply brillant that night, he was kicking goals, Carlton could not go with him. It was probably the best game I've seen by an 08' draftee ever.

He didn't receive 1 vote. Judd did.

Don't forget the Carlton / Geelong game in Round 5. Ablett was unanimously BOG by everyone who watched the game with a brain. 33 touches, 18 contested possessions, 2 goals. In a losing side.

As for Golden Boy? 30 possessions (I think), including a whopping 9 in the second half. 1 goal. Good game, excellent first half, but not, absolutely not BOG.

Brownlow votes - Judd 3 (naturally), Ablett 1. Turn that around the other way it would have been 28 each.

 

[The Panther]

Don't forget the Carlton / Geelong game in Round 5. Ablett was unanimously BOG by everyone who watched the game with a brain. 33 touches, 18 contested possessions, 2 goals. In a losing side.

As for Golden Boy? 30 possessions (I think), including a whopping 9 in the second half. 1 goal. Good game, excellent first half, but not, absolutely not BOG.

Brownlow votes - Judd 3 (naturally), Ablett 1. Turn that around the other way it would have been 28 each.

Round 7 is even more laughable.

Judd 30 disposals, 58% efficiency.
His direct opponent, Lenny Hayes. 28 disposals.

Judd 3 votes..

 

[Kickin_Goals]

You aren't going to convince anyone who actually watched the games in question going over statistics....
The votes Judd gets are often senseless.
He won why does it matter to you guys, in the brownlow its how your teammates poll that tends to matter most and the umps must rather dislike marc murphy and other players that had big performances here and there.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

the coaches thought he was in the top 5 AFL players this season

 

[cfx_1]

Regardless of what you think about Judd's performances, THIS year, he has not had a better year than the following players.

Gary Ablett, Dane Swan, Scott Pendlebury, Matthew Boyd, Lenny Hayes, Leigh Montagna, Luke Hodge, Brendon Goddard and Paul Chapman. I know it, you know it, the media knows it and the umpires haven't a clue.

Past the half way mark the media was bashing the crap out of him, saying he was no longer in the best 15 players in the comp.... And by this time he already had polled 18 votes. I CALL BULLSHIT.

The fact that he polls well in a losing side when his disposal efficiency is part of the reason a side loses, gets off from suspension when he clearly deserved it and gets away with just about anything is a testiment to the fact that the umpires favour him for some unknown reason.

Dane Swan is questionable whether he would have won. The most consistent player but rarely had a stand out performance where you could give him the 3. However i'd argue, against port he deserved it, the second games against melbourne and carlton he also deserved it and against Geelong was close and didn't poll at all.

Gary Ablett stormed home and was a standout performer in many games in a winning team.

You know what i found odd too?? Betts and Garlett polled really average in the games where they kicked bags of 5 or 6.... Why is that?

 

[matty_hawk]

In conclusion

Brownlow year >/= Brownlow medal.

For example, Lake will never win a brownlow, but i would pick his year over Judds, and Judd Smashed him with votes.