Brownlow: Time to remove ‘fairest’ in best and fairest

[daniel_4tw]

Suspensions used to be for players playing dirty. In this day and age there are a lot of suspensions for clumsy and inadvertent actions that the AFL are trying to remove from the game. Which fair enough, as long as it’s consistent.

But should players lose the right to the Brownlow because they attacked the ball slightly wrong? Is this unnecessarily excluding good players from winning the top prize?

It seems the AFL are reluctant to ban top players because they fear they’ll have an ineligible player finish with most votes creating controversy. By removing this from the criteria, we will get more consistency and fairness at the tribunal, whether intentional or subconsciously.

One could argue that the punishment of missing games is already a deterrent. If a player can win the Brownlow with 1-3 less games than everyone else, they are a more deserving winner, not less.

 

[blues4flag]

Absolutely. Been a frustration of mine for a few years. The threshold for a suspension has reduced dramatically to the point where players are being penalised for split second decisions in genuine football actions.

Whether there's a suspension cap (3+ games deems you ineligible), an offence category (non-football actions that result in suspension) or the clause removed altogether, the AFL needs to act before a player misses the Brownlow for a borderline incident.

 

[Madas]

It seems the AFL are reluctant to ban top players because they fear they’ll have an ineligible player finish with most votes creating controversy.


Your honour I present Exhibit A

 

[Ambrosia]

Yeah suspensions for tackles and hits while contesting the ball should not result in players losing Brownlow eligibility

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

It seems the AFL are reluctant to ban top players because they fear they’ll have an ineligible player finish with most votes creating controversy.


Your honour I present Exhibit A

View attachment 1961888

Interesting you post this and not your boy Fyfe elbowing Lynch in the face and escaping punishment in 2019.

Gee you are hurt by the Blues.

 

[Orange crush]

Time to remove best as well ... Lachie Neale

9

Lachie Neale

Age

31

Ht

178cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

27.0

5star

K

11.5

4star

HB

15.5

5star

M

4.0

4star

T

3.7

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

28.3

5star

K

13.9

5star

HB

14.4

5star

M

4.6

4star

T

4.0

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

12.0

3star

K

4.6

2star

HB

7.4

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

1.0

3star

CL

0.4

3star

ffs

 

[MF]

Yep, about 10 years overdue. It's just ridiculous now. We neither want to see a player miss out on a brownlow because of accidental contact, nor conversely see some players receive penalties and others not based on their brownlow favourtism.

It's amazing how reactionary and in favour of needless changes the AFL can be in some areas yet lag so far behind in others.

 

[RUNVS]

The Brownlow is a bullshit award anyway since it is so reliant on

a. being a midfielder
b. being a midfielder that the umpires easily recognise

It isn't a best player in the league award, it is a midfielder award, and many times it doesn't even get that right when deciding who was the best midfielder in the competition in any given year.

 

[Underarm]

The best players tend not to be 'clumsy' on account of them being good footballers.

 

[boncer34]

Nope

 

[AndyLucimitis]

Brownlow is actually 'Fairest and Best' and agree - archaic to leave that fairest criteria in there.

It's a throwback to the days where you had out and out thugs and snipers. These days the game has never been cleaner.

Just let the players get suspended but still be eligible.

Take the Cripps case - even though I'm a Carlton supporter he should have be suspended for 2 weeks give the current standards.

That would have been his 'penalty' and he would not have got votes obviously for those two games and would not have won. But if he was way ahead by Round 21 and still has enough to win even with being suspended for 2 weeks then good luck to him

 

[Cleansweep17]

We already have that. It’s called the coaches award.

Do we really need an award for the same thing. Brownlow, Coaches award and MVP are really similar already.

 

[Randall Stevens]

The Brownlow is a bullshit award anyway since it is so reliant on

a. being a midfielder
b. being a midfielder that the umpires easily recognise

It isn't a best player in the league award, it is a midfielder award, and many times it doesn't even get that right when deciding who was the best midfielder in the competition in any given year.

The midfielder dominance criticism can be applied to all the 'major' awards though.

Since the inception of the coaches award in 2003, 20 out of 23 winners have been midfielders. That includes two years with dual winners, and counting Goodes as a midfielder when he won it in 2006, based on being named on a wing in the All Australian team that year. Gawn is the only 'non-mid' to win the award since 2005.

Over the same period, Nick Riewoldt in 2004 is the only non mid to win the much vaunted - and in my opinion over rated - players MVP. Interestingly, in the prior 21 years since that award began it had been won by either key position players or rucks 10 times.

 

[RUNVS]

The midfielder dominance criticism can be applied to all the 'major' awards though.

Since the inception of the coaches award in 2003, 20 out of 23 winners have been midfielders. That includes two years with dual winners, and counting Goodes as a midfielder when he won it in 2006, based on being named on a wing in the All Australian team that year. Gawn is the only 'non-mid' to win the award since 2005.

Over the same period, Nick Riewoldt in 2004 is the only non mid to win the much vaunted - and in my opinion over rated - players MVP. Interestingly, in the prior 21 years since that award began it had been won by either key position players or rucks 10 times.

To be honest it is why I prefer the All Australian Award as even though it has the same issues in some extent, shoving midfielders into places they should not be (often at the expense of small forwards and defenders) at least there is a mix. At least in the AA team there are tall forwards, tall defenders, ruckmen even one small forward usually makes the cut. It is a more balanced award in terms of players picked.

 

[Quinz]

It's about time they remove suspension automatically making someone ineligible. Should be part of an additional penalty if it's an egregious offence.

Judd, Fyfe [x2], Cripps etc. should have been suspended under the rules but they were bent to keep them eligible. But that's the way it goes.

 

[Cleansweep17]

To be honest it is why I prefer the All Australian Award as even though it has the same issues in some extent, shoving midfielders into places they should not be (often at the expense of small forwards and defenders) at least there is a mix. At least in the AA team there are tall forwards, tall defenders, ruckmen even one small forward usually makes the cut. It is a more balanced award in terms of players picked.

Lockett won a Brownlow.

So have a few older players. Other forwards just haven’t been as good.

 

[Madas]

Interesting you post this and not your boy Fyfe elbowing Lynch in the face and escaping punishment in 2019.

Gee you are hurt by the Blues.

Fyfe missed a 3rd Brownlow because of exactly one of these decisions which would have not been ruled had it been a Selwood , Cotchin type at the time

As far as my hurt goes , read the room mate , everyone other than delusional Blues supporters knew Cripps should have been rubbed out .

Just feeds into the back story of why most people don’t like Carlton .
It ain’t just me , I’m just vocal about it around the same time you lot start pumping up your tyres after another gifted win

You’ll thank me one day for keeping you grounded

 

[RUNVS]

Lockett won a Brownlow.

So have a few older players. Other forwards just haven’t been as good.

If you have to go back to Lockett then I think you have proven my point.

 

[Kavliaris69]

Suspensions used to be for players playing dirty. In this day and age there are a lot of suspensions for clumsy and inadvertent actions that the AFL are trying to remove from the game. Which fair enough, as long as it’s consistent.

But should players lose the right to the Brownlow because they attacked the ball slightly wrong? Is this unnecessarily excluding good players from winning the top prize?

It seems the AFL are reluctant to ban top players because they fear they’ll have an ineligible player finish with most votes creating controversy. By removing this from the criteria, we will get more consistency and fairness at the tribunal, whether intentional or subconsciously.

One could argue that the punishment of missing games is already a deterrent. If a player can win the Brownlow with 1-3 less games than everyone else, they are a more deserving winner, not less.

Good idea but I think it should stay as is. If you go with your suggestion, who decides on which are deemed OK and which are not?

Think about it for a minute, the decision will have to be made on the night as players who have suspensions still get votes along the countdown to last round. Do we stop after every round and they decide who is eligible to go forward or do we wait at the end of the count? This decision can't be made on tribunal day as it will cause a massive shit storm every single week.

 

[Cleansweep17]

If you have to go back to Lockett then I think you have proven my point.

What’s that exactly? Seems pretty clear to me, you can use Brownlows to compare players even forwards. Buddy just wasn’t as good as Lockett.

 

[RUNVS]

What’s that exactly? Seems pretty clear to me, you can use Brownlows to compare players even forwards. Buddy just wasn’t as good as Lockett.

No you can't. The fact 90% of modern Brownlows are midfielders and almost no other position is represented in the 21st century is telling. No one can claim with a straight face that Adam Cooney was a better player than Buddy for instance, or Scarlett.

In fact I think Cooney won the Brownlow the year Buddy kicked 100 goals in a season.

 

[Engimal v3]

Nope

 

[Altum Volantes]

Lockett won a Brownlow.

So have a few older players. Other forwards just haven’t been as good.

Another case in point to remove ‘fairest’ - consider A Grade Thugs, Hitmen and Snipes like Lockett, Greg Williams, Dipper and Tony Liberatore all own Brownlows.

 

[btdg]

I'm going to suggest what I think is a much better system - which is to incorporate a vote penalty for tribunal infractions and suspensions rather than a disqualification.

Quite simply: use tribunal verdicts to apply a vote penalty commensurate with the tribunal penalty:

• an offence that leads to a fine = 1 vote penalty
• an offence that leads to a suspension = 1 + n vote penalty, where n is the number of weeks suspended (ie: 1 week suspension = 2 vote penalty)

On Brownlow night, everyone starts the count knowing where the penalties sit and there's far less awkwardness if an ineligible player is leading. Players who cop a suspension will find it pretty hard to win, but it'll also feel 'fairer' if they do or don't and will still be reflected in the official tally.

Some practical examples here:

• 1997 Brownlow. Instead of being ineligible, Chris Grant receives a 2 vote penalty. He simply finished 3rd, 1 vote behind the winner Robert Harvey
• 2022 Brownlow. I think the tribunal panel actually panicked here and recognised Cripps as a likely winner; I suspect his initial suspension might have been upheld as a 1 week ban rather. In that case, he probably finishes just behind Lachie Neale
  9

  Lachie Neale

  Age

  31

  Ht

  178cm

  Wt

  84kg

  Pos.

  Mid

  Career

  Season

  Last 5

  D

  27.0

  5star

  K

  11.5

  4star

  HB

  15.5

  5star

  M

  4.0

  4star

  T

  3.7

  5star

  CL

  5.9

  5star

  D

  28.3

  5star

  K

  13.9

  5star

  HB

  14.4

  5star

  M

  4.6

  4star

  T

  4.0

  5star

  CL

  5.9

  5star

  D

  12.0

  3star

  K

  4.6

  2star

  HB

  7.4

  5star

  M

  2.0

  3star

  T

  1.0

  3star

  CL

  0.4

  3star

  (bearing in mind he polled votes in the match he would have missed).

 

[Cleansweep17]

No you can't. The fact 90% of modern Brownlows are midfielders and almost no other position is represented in the 21st century is telling. No one can claim with a straight face that Adam Cooney was a better player than Buddy for instance, or Scarlett.

In fact I think Cooney won the Brownlow the year Buddy kicked 100 goals in a season.

Maybe I wasn’t clear. I meant to compare the same type of players.

Yes mids win more (imo because mids influence the game the most) but that doesn’t mean the whole award is worthless. It’s a good measure when comparing the same type of players.

Besides the forwards “Brownlow” is the Coleman. The best player in 08 imo was Buddy and he won the Coleman.