AFL 2021 Brownlow Medal (any results after no posting is automatic card)

[balmainforever]

 

[NYRB]

Does anyone have a collection of the odds for Round 7 North Melbourne v Melbourne to 'Poll 3 Votes' from any of the bookies? i seemed to have lost the odds on that game in my spreadsheet. (if anyone has it stored can you pm me? or post the odds on here? cheers)

This was the game where Fritsch got turned over for the 3 votes......from memory it was pretty short odds.

 

[mozz23]

Does anyone have a collection of the odds for Round 7 North Melbourne v Melbourne to 'Poll 3 Votes' from any of the bookies? i seemed to have lost the odds on that game in my spreadsheet. (if anyone has it stored can you pm me? or post the odds on here? cheers)

This was the game where Fritsch got turned over for the 3 votes......from memory it was pretty short odds.

Fritsch was $1.65

 

[Neale4brownlow]

View attachment 1240875
This one only makes sense if you look at stats alone. 41 point loss and Adelaide get 5/6 votes? At least be consistent if you're gonna reward good games regardless of the result

Wow 7 goal haul good enough for a vote.

Coaches votes were:
10 Bayley Fritsch (MELB)
8 Paul Seedsman (ADEL)
6 Christian Petracca (MELB)
2 Rory Sloane (ADEL)
2 Christian Salem (MELB)
1 Ed Langdon (MELB)
1 Max Gawn (MELB)

 

[Ohh Ok]

View attachment 1240875
This one only makes sense if you look at stats alone. 41 point loss and Adelaide get 5/6 votes? At least be consistent if you're gonna reward good games regardless of the result

This was an odd game though. Melbourne were underwhelming as a whole, and didn’t really have a stand out player that day. Adelaide were in the game majority of the day and Seedsman was probably the best player on ground. Had he have been playing for Melbourne it would’ve been an obvious choice.

Last couple years umpires have started to acknowledge players performing in a loss a bit more which I think is fair, it definitely helps being on a winning team when collecting vote but I don’t think I guys should be discounted simply because his side lost. Walsh polled 3 in a their loss to Geelong 44 v 70, but was by far the best player out there that day.

 

[Ohh Ok]

Wow 7 goal haul good enough for a vote.

Coaches votes were:
10 Bayley Fritsch (MELB)
8 Paul Seedsman (ADEL)
6 Christian Petracca (MELB)
2 Rory Sloane (ADEL)
2 Christian Salem (MELB)
1 Ed Langdon (MELB)
1 Max Gawn (MELB)

The context in which the goals were scored may have been considered on the day. 3 or 4 of them were essentially meaningless in terms of impacting the game and came within the last 2 or so minutes. I also got some reason seem to remember he did a few “prickish” things that day, umpires remember that stuff and unfortunately at times it’ll definitely impact their decision

I’m not trying to say the umpires were right or wrong in their decision, but more so try understand their possible thought process in the decision.

 

[Aussie_boy]

Were there any howlers that people can recall?

I think I saw Walsh get 2 or 3 votes in a game they got demolished by the Pies (90 to 40 odd I think).

As soon as that happened I thought it could have been a Priddis style Brownlow.

If Carlton can actually put together a 50% season at some point, he'll win the brownlow by 6+votes.

On the topic of Priddis, anyone remember what his odds were before the count that year?

Don't punt at all these days but I do enjoy reading this thread every year, you guys all do a great job attempting to analyse what goes through an umps mind...

 

[Billionaire Panda]

Dangerfield played one of the all time inspired Danger games here for 0. Very sus. Seems like if he were eligible this simply would never happen.

 

[iluvparis]

On the topic of Priddis, anyone remember what his odds were before the count that year?

Don't punt at all these days but I do enjoy reading this thread every year, you guys all do a great job attempting to analyse what goes through an umps mind...

$41

 

[NYRB]

Fritsch was $1.65

thanks

View attachment 1240925
Dangerfield played one of the all time inspired Danger games here for 0. Very sus. Seems like if he were eligible this simply would never happen.

Personally didn't think Danger deserved to be as short as he was. if you offered me $2 i would have said 'no bet' pre-count. Sportsbet had the Danger at $1.35 for that game.

 

[NYRB]

What I have noticed this year, alot more unquoted players seem to be getting up on the '3 Vote Markets' just having a quick look at what Sportsbet odds offered:

Rd 1 Draper Unquoted
Rd 4 Sam Walsh

18

Sam Walsh

Age

24

Ht

184cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

25.1

5star

K

13.5

5star

HB

11.6

5star

M

5.1

5star

T

3.2

5star

CL

3.4

5star

No current season stats available

D

26.2

5star

K

15.4

5star

HB

10.8

5star

M

6.0

5star

T

3.2

5star

CL

4.8

5star

Unquoted
Rd 6 Lachie Henderson Unquoted
Rd 9 Tarryn Thomas

26

Tarryn Thomas

Age

24

Ht

190cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.0

3star

K

5.3

2star

HB

5.7

4star

M

2.1

2star

T

3.3

5star

CL

0.9

3star

D

7.8

2star

K

4.0

1star

HB

3.8

3star

M

1.3

1star

T

3.2

4star

CL

0.2

2star

D

12.8

4star

K

6.2

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

3.8

5star

CL

0.4

3star

Unquoted

All 4 games alone, had other players listed at least $51 or more...............

But Walsh polling the 3 in Round 4 was by 'name' only, think there were about 5 players or so for me better than him that night. Alot of outlets didnt have him for votes here, coaches votes gave him 1..................I had him quoted at around $33 to get the BOG in Rd 4. And if you offered me that I would have gladly taken it. Big name players at big odds, I guess for me, is always worth a bet- as umps are attracted to the 'star names' if in doubt.

 

[Neale4brownlow]

What I have noticed this year, alot more unquoted players seem to be getting up on the '3 Vote Markets' just having a quick look at what Sportsbet odds offered:

Rd 1 Draper Unquoted
Rd 4 Sam Walsh Unquoted
Rd 6 Lachie Henderson Unquoted
Rd 9 Tarryn Thomas Unquoted

All 4 games alone, had other players listed at least $51 or more...............

But Walsh polling the 3 in Round 4 was by 'name' only, think there were about 5 players or so for me better than him that night. Alot of outlets didnt have him for votes here, coaches votes gave him 1..................I had him quoted at around $33 to get the BOG in Rd 4. And if you offered me that I would have gladly taken it. Big name players at big odds, I guess for me, is always worth a bet- as umps are attracted to the 'star names' if in doubt.

How often would that happen though?

$33 to 1 seems about right when you're basically looking for a needle in a haystack (good player who has an ok game but not so good to shorten his odds, but not so bad the umps dont notice him at all).

 

[NYRB]

How often would that happen though?

$33 to 1 seems about right when you're basically looking for a needle in a haystack (good player who has an ok game but not so good to shorten his odds, but not so bad the umps dont notice him at all).

One of the games I requested from Sportsbet, was a quote for Petracca, who wasn't listed as a runner for one of the games. When they did include him, they had him as 3rd favourite at around $26 from memory. So thats about as good as you will get ...................


It doesn't hurt to ask in my opinion, Im not sure if you can around bartering for odds with bookies- not sure if anyone else in here has done it either.

If Walsh was under $30 to get BOG in Rd 4, if I had that option yesterday pre-count, again that would have been a 'no bet ' from me for Walsh to poll 3 in Rd 4. Think its important to have 'value' or what kind of expectation you want when backing odds.

Think my good wins yesterday were from the '3 vote markets' not putting accumulators here and there. Think that will be my focus for next year.

 

[Geeves Train]

 

[checkraiseulite]

The problem with betting on the brownlow is umpire bias. Hence why i generally hate betting on it. Most gambling comes down to your knowledge of the sport or being more skilled than the bookie/dealer. Umpires throw everything into dissaray. Ill stick to my same game multi’s and Thoroughbreds.

brownlow betting comes down to not who you think is the best but who you think the umpires think is the best.

 

[NYRB]

I reckon next year Sportsbet/PointsBet/Ladbrokes might considering offering multis 'Game by Game'. Why not allow punters to say multi games < less than $3.00 or $3.50 or an option where you multi the favourites from each game for however many legs they want - for them I reckon it would be a money spinner for them. (even offering the Booster along with it) This is an example of the contenders who were favourites:




Wines, Parish and Parker would be the only 3 accumulators to get up on my 'Brownlow Cheat Sheet'. From the Sportsbet outright favourite markets in the '3 Vote Games', Wines polled 6/6 from his favourites, Parish polled 6/6 from his favourites and Parker polled 3/3 from his favourites. I've included my own odds and expectations as well. Alot of punters would only see the 'big odds' and get tricked into backing something say 30/1 for Oliver to poll all 3 votes in his 8 games, when in reality its around a 90/1 shot. Fair play to TopSport who at least had that option available. Also to multi 6 legs of Wines game for $3.60 for me is the way to the poor house. My model would want at least 64 bucks or better.

 

[Neale4brownlow]

brownlow betting comes down to not who you think is the best but who you think the umpires think is the best.

 

[2006_Eagles]

brownlow betting comes down to not who you think is the best but who you think the umpires think is the best.

That's why I loaded up on Bont at about round 16. Then he proceeded to be a complete turd from then on for no reason

 

[Peterjv]

Were there any howlers that people can recall?

I think I saw Walsh get 2 or 3 votes in a game they got demolished by the Pies (90 to 40 odd I think).

As soon as that happened I thought it could have been a Priddis style Brownlow.

If Carlton can actually put together a 50% season at some point, he'll win the brownlow by 6+votes.

A couple of notables:

Round 1 - ESS (91) v HAW (92) - S Draper polling 3 with 10 touches, whilst T Mitchell with 39 touches (6 more than the next best) gets nothing.

Round 4 - GC (59) v CAR (70) - S Walsh polling the 3 in one of his quietest games of his season, whilst E Curnow (32 disposals, 24 effective and 12 contested) gets nothing.

Round 4 - FRE (96) v HAW (81) - N Fyfe missing out on the votes completely. Yes he did kick 0.6, but was huge otherwise. If it was 2019, he would have polled 3.

Round 6 - GWS (65) v WB (104) - J Macrae not polling a single vote, in a game where he had 40 disposals (5 better than the next best) and was clear BOG.

Round 6 - GEE (136) v (WC) - L Henderson polling 3 votes ... just .. how?

Round 9 - HAW (80) v NM (87) - T Thomas polling the 3 with 18 touches, whilst J Simpkin (38 disposals with 26 effective and 23 contested and 14 clearances) gets nothing.

Round 17 - HAW (46) v FRE (108) - S Darcy not polling a single vote despite 14 hitouts to advantage, 6 contested marks, and a dominant display in the ruck.

Round 18 - FRE (31) v GEE (100) - S Menegola not polling a single vote despite one of the best games of his career. Should learn from last year that he is simply not a vote getter in the umps minds.

Round 19 - POR (97) v COL (69) - W Drew not polling a single vote despite 32 disposals (most on ground) and 16 contested possessions. In this game was clearly better than Wines but Wines gets the 3 and Drew Zilch.

Round 21 - WC (63) v MEL (72) - L Jackson getting the 3 votes ... that's an unusual way to spell Yeo/Petracca for 3 votes.

Round 22 - HAW (64) v WB (37) - D Howe most noticeable player on ground by a long way. 34 disposals (7 more than next best in his team T Mitchell who got the 3) and a huge game, but misses out on the votes completely.

Round 22 - GEE (85) v STK (71) - P Dangerfield clear BOG but misses out on the votes altogether. Ironic that Menegola (also a very good game) finally got recognised by the umps.

Round 23 - BRI (125) v WC (87) - Yes West Coast lost, but N Naitanui not polling a single vote whilst touching up the Big O with 53 hitouts (20 hitouts to advantage) is a farce.

Would absolutely love to know what was going on in the umpires minds with some of these decisions.

To quote a coach in the other code: "I’ve got this thing, like that circus music going on in the background, and streamers and stuff, there must be something going on (when the umpires discuss their votes), there must be something that distracts them"

 

[2006_Eagles]

He didn't finish top 5. He tied for 5th and 6th spot.

Of course people don't like their odds getting halved but a two way tie is just as much a loss as it is a win

It's literally mathematics. Any argument against it is completely ******ed

 

[NYRB]

Round 21 - WC (63) v MEL (72) - L Jackson getting the 3 votes ... that's an unusual way to spell Yeo/Petracca for 3 votes.

The reaction on Petracca's face said it all after Jackson received the votes there.

 

[2006_Eagles]

That was one of the biggest BS 3 votes ive ever seen. It’s just another reminder of what umpires are looking for.

Big bullocking players, contested beasts.

I know every year we say, have to remember this player polled well, have to remember that player polled well but in reality their is a group of the top most well known players that can poll out of their ass. Some of the votes for bont and Ollie wines were such bullshit.

For instance Brayshaw who polled great last year, was ok this year. Macrae has polled decent for years, polled like sh*t this year. It really is such a raffle when you have different umpires (and combinations of umpires) adjudicating different games. Trends can be broken so easily. Except the those really well known experienced top group I.e. Mitchell, Franklin, bontempelli, boak, fyfe etc

That's why you factor in known umpire bias

 

[iluvparis]

I reckon if I was an AFL umpire I would legit submit troll votes in the Brownlow some games. Probs against their code of conduct though.

 

[2006_Eagles]

If we're struggling to understand dead heat rules it's probably time to stop punting

It's mind numbing hearing people trying to argue if 50 people tie all 50 should be paid in full

 

[2006_Eagles]

I reckon if I was an AFL umpire I would legit submit troll votes in the Brownlow some games. Probs against their code of conduct though.

Donkey voting Brownlow votes lmaoooooo

 

[iluvparis]

It's mind numbing hearing people trying to argue if 50 people tie all 50 should be paid in full

Reminds me of someone asking Greg Carpenter if there is a 4-way dead heat in the Hotham Handicap do all of the winners get into the Melbourne Cup (the answer FWIW is YES!)