Did the Pies players get it wrong??

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Apologies if this has been brought up before, if so Mods, please delete

Chris Judd won the AFLPA award as the best player in the league according to the 600+ players in the league. He beat many very very good players to do this, however, to do it, he wasn't put up against Swan as the Pies players nominated Thomas, Cloke and Pendlebury as their 3 'most influential' players this season.

Swan then goes on to win the brownlow.

What does this say about either 1) the Pies players view of Swan's year or 2) the umpires view of the game

I realise that the players can only nominate 3 players and you can't really argue that the players they nominated were certainly very good.

So who got it wrong??

p.s. To Collingwood players, this isn't meant to be an attack on your team, or sour grapes from the weekend, just think it's a funny situation

 

[gogopies11]

no the umpires got it wrong, just like they did last year

 

[blaze036]

Pendlebury had a better season than Swan no doubt, u notice swan a lot more though so he draws more votes. (coincidence that Pendlebury stopped polling so well after he lost the dregs? hmmm)

 

[gravy1]

Simply a share the love situation with the Collingwood boys. Swan has been nominated by the group for the past few years for the AFL MVP, they were just giving some other players some limelight.

 

[JockMc]

Being the best player doesn't make you the most valuable player.

Sen, 3aw, Mmm & the Abc all had 3, 2 & 1 voting systems. Swan won 3 of the awards.

The MVP & AFLCA aren't the best methods owing to the way they are voted on.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

The MVP & AFLCA aren't the best methods owing to the way they are voted on.

The MVP voting method once handed the most courageous award to Ryan Lonie

 

[Madison]

I think Swan had a better year than Thomas, but I still think Pendles had the best year of anyone in the AFL.

And Cloke defs counts as the top three MVP at Collingwood.

 

[BrandonG]

umpires got it wrong , swan deserved it last year when judd got it and this year either pendles or murphy deserved it

aflpa and aflca imho mean more then the brownlow

 

[Stax on the mill]

The MVP voting method once handed the most courageous award to Ryan Lonie

Yes it did, in large part due to a pretty childish act by the Brisbane Lions players. They thought it was a great joke to humiliate a very decent bloke by voting enmasse for Lonie. He was a fairly reasonable player, but certainly not noted for his toughness.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Yes it did, in large part due to a pretty childish act by the Brisbane Lions players. They thought it was a great joke to humiliate a very decent bloke by voting enmasse for Lonie. He was a fairly reasonable player, but certainly not noted for his toughness.

No doubt it illustrates how seriously the players take the voting,though.

Collingwood players didnt nominate Swan simply because they nominated him last year and wanted to share the love with Daisy instead.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

AFLCA aren't the best methods owing to the way they are voted on.

Surely the AFLCA is the best voting method in any AFL award at present???

 

[Monkey King]

Sen, 3aw, Mmm & the Abc all had 3, 2 & 1 voting systems. Swan won 3 of the awards.

Erm ... don't they only vote on games they broadcast? Not a very good system when all games aren't voted on; and you just finished bagging the AFLCA award

As for the OP's question, Swan wouldn't have won the MVP. Umos handed out the Brownlow to the wrong player ... again!

 

[JockMc]

Surely the AFLCA is the best voting method in any AFL award at present???

Why would it be?

The 2 coaches award their 1-5 votes after the game. 1/2 of these votes are awarded to players from their own side & the idea of neutrality goes out the window.

It's effectively getting your own fan base to vote for an award.

 

[Blues_Man]

Apologies if this has been brought up before, if so Mods, please delete

Chris Judd won the AFLPA award as the best player in the league according to the 600+ players in the league. He beat many very very good players to do this, however, to do it, he wasn't put up against Swan as the Pies players nominated Thomas, Cloke and Pendlebury as their 3 'most influential' players this season.

Swan then goes on to win the brownlow.

What does this say about either 1) the Pies players view of Swan's year or 2) the umpires view of the game

I realise that the players can only nominate 3 players and you can't really argue that the players they nominated were certainly very good.

So who got it wrong??

p.s. To Collingwood players, this isn't meant to be an attack on your team, or sour grapes from the weekend, just think it's a funny situation

Geeze it isn't rocket science ...the players will nominate their own players out of bias.
The Umpires were told by all and sundry that they got it wrong last year ..so this year they over compensated ..and got it wrong again .

 

[StillWaiting5689]

Surely the AFLCA is the best voting method in any AFL award at present???

It would be if you could see the coaches split, that way we could get an understanding of the bias.

 

[TheLip]

The Umpires were told by all and sundry that they got it wrong last year ..so this year they over compensated ..and got it wrong again .

I'm not known for agreeing with Carlton supporters but... This!

 

[Hawthorn United]

Erm ... don't they only vote on games they broadcast? Not a very good system when all games aren't voted on; and you just finished bagging the AFLCA award

As for the OP's question, Swan wouldn't have won the MVP. Umos handed out the Brownlow to the wrong player ... again!

No. They have their around the grounds men that watch the games and give votes for those games.

 

[The Finger]

Maybe Collingwood players and Coach dont rate Swans stats as important. Theyed be well aware of the fact were Swan gets his kicks and the effectiveness of them.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Why would it be?

The 2 coaches award their 1-5 votes after the game. 1/2 of these votes are awarded to players from their own side & the idea of neutrality goes out the window.

It's effectively getting your own fan base to vote for an award.

You don't seem to fully grasp the strengths of the award yet still focus on the weaknesses.

The votes are awarded after match review is concluded, ie after the coaching staff have sat down and analysed the match. Unlike any other round-by-round award we presently have.

Neutrality is mitigated by it being easily able to decipher the breakdown of votes for anyone with a modicum of mathematical prowess, but it is still a problem as with any award.

Your post implies coaches are necessarily more biased than media presenters or footballers and football personalities, yet you don't offer up the stronger alternative.

Coaches know which opposition players have carved their team up, and conversely which of their own players have adhered to 'tactics' and 'structures'

It blends some of the best aspects of club awards with the strengths of round-by-round AFL voting systems.

 

[RECORDS!]

The players got it wrong.

People have become complacent about his form.

When I got the papers on Monday morning they both went through the season and had him having 10 games where they thought he would prob be voted BOG (I think he ended up having 7)

That was enough for me to have $100 on him at 14/1. Happy days.

This talk of him not deserving it is nonsense. He should have 2 of them.

 

[JockMc]

Your post implies coaches are necessarily more biased than media presenters or footballers and football personalities, yet you don't offer up the stronger alternative.

All I said is that the AFLCA Award has major weaknesses as it does. The alternative & the best one is an award that is voted on by 3 neutral judges.

If the AFLCA Award was transparent & you could see the breakdown of a players votes based on their own coaches vote then it would have more credibility. You have to ask yourself this, why is this withheld?

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

^ As I said, because you can discern this for yourself in most every case.

But this anonymity speaks to the respect coaches have for one another and their respect for the players.

Not to mention the AFLCA members would be 'sworn in' as unbiased and impartial when voting on these awards (admittedly, as with any award).

Who are these three impartial judges anyways? Why is their impartiality inferred?

 

[TheLip]

Maybe Collingwood players and Coach dont rate Swans stats as important.

Not unlike the way everyone on BF regards your troll posts.

 

[MarkT2]

Pendlebury had a better season than Swan no doubt, u notice swan a lot more though so he draws more votes. (coincidence that Pendlebury stopped polling so well after he lost the dregs? hmmm)

I don't know that pendlebury had a better year than Swan at all.

FWIW I suspect the 3 nominations from Collingwood were in part designed to share the spoils amoung other well peformed players. The B&F will be interesting.

 

[MarkT2]

Maybe Collingwood players and Coach dont rate Swans stats as important. Theyed be well aware of the fact were Swan gets his kicks and the effectiveness of them.

Yeh, maybe Swan will miss out on his 4th consecutive B&F. Then again maybe he will win his second straight B&F in a premiership year. Who knows. we'll find out soon....