Oppo Camp 2024 Finals Discussion (other games)

[hardway]

Cripps winning is wonderful. Pretty much guarantees Carlton won’t get near any team silverware for another decade. Individual glory goes to their heads as a club.

 

[Worth a Kick]

Or just take the voting off them completely, the award is a joke because of them

Who gets the job of voting though? Mids when every other award be it Media, coaches or players/player. It’s just how it is.

 

[DogDaySonny]

My view is that the Brownlow voting has the most integrity and accuracy when it picks a first time winner, someone without the “approved winner” stamp. This isn’t a strict rule as there are always exceptions. Nick Daicos will violate that rule. Matthew Priddis did. But by and large first time winners tend to be better choices as they had to fight their way above the approved narrative.

I have no idea how to improve the system other than perhaps a blend of umpire (50%), coaches (25%), and fans (25%) voting on each game each week. Or something along those lines.

 

[unitedhawk]

I wonder how many coaches' votes Blake Hardwick

15

Blake Hardwick

Age

27

Ht

183cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

15.8

4star

K

9.7

4star

HB

6.1

4star

M

4.4

4star

T

2.7

4star

MG

264.7

4star

D

13.8

3star

K

9.8

4star

HB

4.0

3star

M

3.2

3star

T

1.7

3star

MG

264.7

4star

D

15.0

4star

K

8.8

4star

HB

6.2

4star

M

5.0

5star

T

1.4

4star

has received over the years. Would be a heck of a lot more than two!

Fwiw, I regard the coaches' votes as being more relevant than those from umpires, who have enough to focus their attention on during games without having to worry about who's having a good game and who isn't. Who knows, perhaps they might even improve their core task of umpiring the game if the responsibility of allocating Brownlow votes was taken away from them!

Why not have an independent adjudicator for 3-2-1 Brownlow votes at each game? All you'll need is a rotating panel comprising around a dozen folk. The votes can be sealed as they're currently done, to preserve security.

We already have a panel for Norm Smith votes for the GF. Why not extend that for the Brownlow? We might then even have defenders or forwards winning it occasionally...

 

[burger09]

Enjoy the Browlow for what it is

A promotional tool for WAGs and Sports betting agencies.

It puts the AFL in the media spotight.

Do not expect the winner to be without doubt the best player in the game.

The chance of a random upset is a great part of the awards mystique. (See betting agencies as above)

 

[Mitchell Madness]

I wonder how many coaches' votes Blake Hardwick has received over the years. Would be a heck of a lot more than two!

Fwiw, I regard the coaches' votes as being more relevant than those from umpires, who have enough to focus their attention on during games without having to worry about who's having a good game and who isn't. Who knows, perhaps they might even improve their core task of umpiring the game if the responsibility of allocating Brownlow votes was taken away from them!

Why not have an independent adjudicator for 3-2-1 Brownlow votes at each game? All you'll need is a rotating panel comprising around a dozen folk. The votes can be sealed as they're currently done, to preserve security.

We already have a panel for Norm Smith votes for the GF. Why not extend that for the Brownlow? We might then even have defenders or forwards winning it occasionally...

1. Coaches votes can be manipulated. We've seen Chris Scott give players votes in games they weren't in the top players by any metric.

2. Panels don't work. aa is proof of that. As is the 3 times Dustin Martin won the norm Smith when he wasn't in the top players on the ground (ok, he maybe deserved one)

 

[TONYC3163]

Gold!

 

[KermitJagger]

Cripps and Daicos were polling votes in games where their possession count was in the teens, disposal efficiency of 14% and getting subbed out mid game through injury, whilst Bontepelli had games where he had 30+ touches, 10 coaches votes and didn’t get anything.

Not sure this can be fixed.

When Swan set the record at what felt like an unbeatable 34, he averaged 32 disposals, kicked 32 goals. When Danger broke it, he did it with 32 disposals and 24 goals. When Dusty broke it again, he did it with an insane 30 disposals, 37 goals and 9 score involvements.

Somehow Cripps has broken the record by 9 votes with 28 and 17. His other stats aren't even better, ground ball, clearances all either slightly worse or the same.

 

[Sturty]

Anyone catch AFL360 last night when Mcrae said he gave best coach votes to Donuts Hinkley?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

2. Panels don't work. aa is proof of that. As is the 3 times Dustin Martin won the norm Smith when he wasn't in the top players on the ground (ok, he maybe deserved one)

Agreed with your overall point but Dusty was easily in the best players every time he won a Norm - he just should have been runner up to Houli at least once if not twice.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Anyone catch AFL360 last night when Mcrae said he gave best coach votes to Donuts Hinkley?

The more he talks the less I like him - so glad we ended up with Sam and not him.

 

[Mercy Seat]

When Swan set the record at what felt like an unbeatable 34, he averaged 32 disposals, kicked 32 goals. When Danger broke it, he did it with 32 disposals and 24 goals. When Dusty broke it again, he did it with an insane 30 disposals, 37 goals and 9 score involvements.

Somehow Cripps has broken the record by 9 votes with 28 and 17. His other stats aren't even better, ground ball, clearances all either slightly worse or the same.

The fact there are now 4 umps now, I think these things become more of a "decision by committee" where they err on the side of reputation. Umps are under so much more scrutiny and pressure in today's game, I don't envy them having to decide the votes as well at the end of the game. I'm not sure what the answer is because we already have prestigious awards decided by coaches / panels.

 

[grumbleguts]

I wonder how many coaches' votes Blake Hardwick has received over the years. Would be a heck of a lot more than two!

Fwiw, I regard the coaches' votes as being more relevant than those from umpires, who have enough to focus their attention on during games without having to worry about who's having a good game and who isn't. Who knows, perhaps they might even improve their core task of umpiring the game if the responsibility of allocating Brownlow votes was taken away from them!

Why not have an independent adjudicator for 3-2-1 Brownlow votes at each game? All you'll need is a rotating panel comprising around a dozen folk. The votes can be sealed as they're currently done, to preserve security.

We already have a panel for Norm Smith votes for the GF. Why not extend that for the Brownlow? We might then even have defenders or forwards winning it occasionally...

We could use the AA panel that would... WHAT AM I SAYING?

 

[cryptor]

When Swan set the record at what felt like an unbeatable 34, he averaged 32 disposals, kicked 32 goals. When Danger broke it, he did it with 32 disposals and 24 goals. When Dusty broke it again, he did it with an insane 30 disposals, 37 goals and 9 score involvements.

Somehow Cripps has broken the record by 9 votes with 28 and 17. His other stats aren't even better, ground ball, clearances all either slightly worse or the same.

The only other Carlton mid who is likely to get votes is Walsh and he had a down year by his standards. The rest of the firepower at Carlton are in the arcs and they need to have especially good games to get votes over a clearance winning mid.

The umps are seduced by the clearance bulls who win the centre clearance, burst away and then either kick the goal on the run or hit up a target inside 50. The controlling umpire who does the centre bounce has front row seats to that show potentially multiple times a game and at least one of the other umpires will be watching that play unfold from the half forward line.

It also helps that the centre bounce always happens after a restart in play (goal or start of quarter) so there is always a clear delineation between that play and everything else, along with a limited number of players in the area. Most other great pieces of play during a game could be lost in the chaos of what happened immediately before or after that moment and be crowded with double or more players in the area.

 

[DogDaySonny]

Anyone catch AFL360 last night when Mcrae said he gave best coach votes to Donuts Hinkley?

The Club is circling the wagons. It's why the media all jumped to Hinkley's defence after frying him for the two previous months.

More important than insightful commentary is that only certified Club members may criticise and legitimately pass judgment. So, when K-K-K-Ken's performance becomes the subject of non-Club discussion, the Club deligitimises it. Ginni gets too fresh and doesn't show the Club the deference they expect, then they will get Ginni as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

Of all truths, this must be remembered: The Club runs the show and the Club alone decides who gets to be in the Club.

 

[DogDaySonny]

The fact there are now 4 umps now, I think these things become more of a "decision by committee" where they err on the side of reputation. Umps are under so much more scrutiny and pressure in today's game, I don't envy them having to decide the votes as well at the end of the game. I'm not sure what the answer is because we already have prestigious awards decided by coaches / panels.

No one ever got fired for buying IBM, as the saying goes. Likewise, no ump ever got criticised for picking Cripps (or Daicos, or...) for BOG in any one game.

 

[unitedhawk]

We could use the AA panel that would... WHAT AM I SAYING?

I'd suggest any panel would be better than the current scenario, not least because of the collateral benefit of allowing the umpires to focus on... umpiring!