Coach maximum Discrepant Anomalies In Coach OpinionS Index(D.A.I.C.Os index)

Meteoric Rise

Meteoric Rise

Gout Gout 🤙
Veteran 10k Posts
Feb 4, 2008
18,233
38,364
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
No idea how that happens to make an anagram exactly the same as last year's Coaches MVP, just one of life's weird coincidences I guess.

Thought it was time we had a thread about this simmering little talking point, as much to protect the reputations of the innocent as anything.

We can track this and discuss it here. To me the Coaches MVP used to be about the most prestigious award, certainly the most credible. Now I am less sure.

Votes being given to N Daicos by C McRae in particular have raised a few eyebrows. Said player actually won the award last year. He was the only player in the top 6 in the award last year who was not also in the top 6 for average player ratings.

The truth is we don't know which coach gives which votes and we also often don't know how a players votes are comprised, like a 5 vote game could possibly be 5-0, or 3-2 when you consider all the other votes. So how can we make objective sense of this to help us understand what could be happening?

My suggestion here is a new index, the maximum discrepant anomalies in coach opinions when they issue their votes weekly in season.

How this works:

We simply work out the maximum possible discrepancy between the 2 coaches votes for the player we are interested in.

Eg

2025 Rd 2 Bulldogs v Magpies we get the following votes -

1742808037272.png

We can see here 3 players have 8 votes. So 1 of the 3 must have got 4+4 and the other 2 got 5+3.

So for Daicos, the maximum dicrepancy possible is 5-3 = 2.

So how did 2024 look for the accidentally eponymous hero of the thread?

He received 117 votes overall. His maximum discrepancy was by my calculations, 23 votes. Ie, the maximum Mcrae could have given him is 70 votes. The minimum opposition clubs could have given him was 47 votes. It seems quite a discrepancy, but we are comparing the maximum possible with the minimum possible to derive that discrepancy, so how does it compare with others?

2024 Isaac Heeney had a maximum discrepancy of just 12 votes. The minimum possible he could have received from opposition coaches was 50 votes, 3 more thanDaicos's minimum.

2017 Dusty got 122 votes, the highest ever. His maximum discrepancy was 10 votes. 66-56 was his max possible discrepancy between one coach and the other.

The really interesting thing here so far is Daicos 2025. After just 3 rounds he already has a maximum possible discrepancy of 7 votes, on world record pace.

Feel free to request other players maximum discrepancies, or contribute yourselves by submitting some. :)
 
Last edited:
Sounds like a very useful index to track.

If a maximum possible opposition coaches votes metric could be useful that would be useful - it’d probably only be the players actual score or 5 if he got at least 5 though
 
sabso said:
Sounds like a very useful index to track.

If a maximum possible opposition coaches votes metric could be useful that would be useful - it’d probably only be the players actual score or 5 if he got at least 5 though
Click to expand...

You can figure it out from the spread of votes.

When Dusty won the award with a record 122 votes, he had a minimum possible opposition vote of 56 votes.

Daicos with 117 votes total 2024 had a minimum possibe opposition vote of 47.

Heeney with 112 votes in 2024 had a minimum possible opposition vote of 50.

As we can see with these 3 results, Daicos's total votes are out of line with his minimum opposition figure when compared to the other 2.

I will look at a few more players of interest and report back.
 
Last edited:
Meteoric Rise said:
AKA the max D.A.I.C.OS index. No idea how that happens to make an anagram exactly the same as last year's Coaches MVP, just one of lif's weird coincidences I guess.

Thought it was time we had a thread about this simmering little talking point, as much to protect the reputations of the innocent as anything.

We can track this and discuss it here. To me the Coches MVP used to be about the most prestigious award, certainly the most credible. Now I am less sure.

Votes being given to N Daicos by C McRae in particular have raised a few eyebrows. Said player actually won the award last year. He was the only player in the top 6 in the award last year who was not also in the top 6 for average player ratings.

The truth is we don't know which coach gives which votes and we also often don't know how a players votes are comprised, like a 5 vote game could possibly be 5-0, or 3-2 when you consider all the other votes. So how can we make objective sense of this to help us understand what could be happening?

My suggestion here is a new index, the maximum discrepant anomalies in coach opinions when they issue their votes weekly in season.

How this works:

We simply work out the maximum possible discrepancy between the 2 coaches votes for the player we are interested in.

Eg

2025 Rd 2 Bulldogs v Magpies we get the following votes -

View attachment 2260096

We can see here 3 players have 8 votes. So 1 of the 3 must have got 4+4 and the other 2 got 5+3.

So for Daicos, the maximum dicrepancy possible is 5-3 = 2.

So how did 2024 look for the accidentally eponymous hero of the thread?

He received 117 votes overall. His maximum discrepancy was by my calculations, 23 votes. Ie, the maximum Mcrae could have given him is 70 votes. The minimum opposition clubs could have given him was 47 votes. It seems quite a discrepancy, but we are comparing the maximum possible with the minimum possible to derive that discrepancy, so how does it compare with others?

2024 Isaac Heeney had a maximum discrepancy of just 12 votes. The minimum possible he could have received from opposition coaches was 50 votes, 3 more thanDaicos's minimum.

2017 Dusty got 122 votes, the highest ever. His maximum discrepancy was 10 votes. 66-56 was his max possible discrepancy between one coach and the other.

The really interesting thing here so far is Daicos 2025. After just 3 rounds he already has a maximum possible discrepancy of 7 votes, on world record pace.

Feel free to request other players maximum discrepancies, or contribute yourselves by submitting some. :)
Click to expand...
Looks like a calc that is biased against consistent players (who may score often in the 4-8 range) and towards the “unreliably brilliant” players who may score 10’s but less often.
 
Cripps 2024 got 113 votes total. He had big max discrepancy of 19, so up there, but still comfortably behind Daicos.

So far 4 players.

Dusty 2017 122 total votes, 56 min possible oppo votes. Max discrepancy = 10 votes
Heeney 2024 112, 50. Max Disc = 12 votes
Daicos 2024 117, 47 MD = 23 votes
Cripps 2024 113, 47 MD = 19 votes

Daicos still leads the Max D.A.I.C.Os Index, but it is early days yet.



Let's have a bit of a look at Daicos in 2022 & 2023 just out of interest.....

2022 Daicos 30 total votes, 10 min possible oppo votes. MD = 10( massive figure from 30 total votes.)

2023 Daicos (regular season only) 99 votes total, 41 min possible oppo votes. MD = 18 votes.

2023 Daicos (finals only) 7 votes total, 0 min oppo votes. MD = 7 votes

2023 All games 106 votes, 41 min oppo votes. MD = 24 votes.

2025 Daicos 13 votes total, 3 min oppo votes

So Daicos whole career = 266 total career coaches votes. Minimum possible oppo votes = 101 votes Max career discrepancy = 64 votes(165 max votes from Mcrae less 101 minimum votes from opposition coaches.)

Daicos sure seems to divide opinion between the coaches a lot. :)
 
Last edited:
SC_Power said:
Looks like a calc that is biased against consistent players (who may score often in the 4-8 range) and towards the “unreliably brilliant” players who may score 10’s but less often.
Click to expand...

There is no bias here, only facts.

What we are looking for is the maximum possible discrepancy between what players receive from their own coach compared to the minimum possible they receive from the opposition coach. Of course these are maximum & minimum possibilities, we know no more than that.

I would think it is safe to assume coaches mostly give more votes to their own players & less to opposition players where there is disagreement, but there well could be exceptions to that. It just doesn't appear that Craig McRae is one of those exceptions, especially when it comes to N Daicos.
 
Last edited:
yirra_kurl said:
this is fascinating stuff. thanks.

How do you know it's the opposition coaches votes? or is that a guesstimate?
Click to expand...

In cases of uneven votes, we do not know how many votes which coach gives to each player. What we do know is the maximum possible discrepancy between the two. So in this thread I am focussing on that.
 
Last edited:
Meteoric Rise said:
There is no bias here, only facts.

What we are looking for is the maximum possible discrepancy between what players receive from their own coach compared to the minimum possible they receive from the opposition coach. Of course these are maximum & minimum possibilities, we know no more than that.

I would think it is safe to assume coaches mostly give more votes to their own players & less to opposition players where there is disgreement, but there well could be exceptions to that. It just doesn't appear that Craig McRae is one of those exceptions, especially when it comes to N Daicos.
Click to expand...
There is bias in interpreting the results of the calculations, just stating them as facts doesn’t change that.

If a player gets 10 votes and 0 votes over 2 games, you KNOW there is no discrepancy.
If a player gets 4 and 6 in the same two games, they MAY have 0 vote discrepancy, or they may have +8, or they may even have -8 (the opposition coaches rates the player higher than their own coach), we simply don’t know.

Given we don’t know, taking the maximum possible clearly means that there is a bias against the more consistent player.

Happy for someone to explain why my analysis isn’t correct.
 
Powerade 08 said:
Great thread.

He was leading by a fair margin before his leg injury in round 19. its a complete joke.

Their own BnF votes tell a different story. He finished equal second with Maynard.
Click to expand...

Let's have look at your 2023 winner Zac Butters...

He got 109 votes total. His maximum total possible from Hinkley is 66, minimum possible from opposition coches is 43. So it is a Daicos 2024 equalling 23 vote max discrepancy for Butters, behind only Daicos's 25 vote max discrepancy in 2023 at this stage.

The thing to note with Butters 2023 is that 2 of his team-mates also polled heavily that year, Rozee 7th with 87 votes, Houston 18th with 62 votes. Between the trio they got 258 votes. The maximum possible votes for 3 players from 23 games is 552 votes, so collectively they received almost half the max available votes for 3 players. On many occasions 2 or 3 of them received uneven amounts of votes, and there wouldn't be a particular reason Hinkley would consistently favour one over the others, especially early season. So Butters' anomaly here is a lot more likely to be so large due to genuine difficulties sorting out the pecking order between the trio in a lot of matches.

But so far:

Daicos 2023 25 votes max discrepancy
Daicos 2024 23 votes
Butters 2023 23 votes
Cripps 2024 19 votes
Heeney 2024 12 votes
Dusty 2017 10 votes

I will look at some more players tomorrow, especially players who have won the Coaches MVP.
 
Last edited:
SC_Power said:
There is bias in interpreting the results of the calculations, just stating them as facts doesn’t change that.

If a player gets 10 votes and 0 votes over 2 games, you KNOW there is no discrepancy.
If a player gets 4 and 6 in the same two games, they MAY have 0 vote discrepancy, or they may have +8, or they may even have -8 (the opposition coaches rates the player higher than their own coach), we simply don’t know.

Given we don’t know, taking the maximum possible clearly means that there is a bias against the more consistent player.

Happy for someone to explain why my analysis isn’t correct.
Click to expand...

Discrepancies cannot occur where a player receives maximum votes(10) that is correct.

It is possible discrepancies can occur at every amount of votes below the maximum. Every odd number of votes is a certain discrepancy. Every even number below 10 is a possibility to result from disparate votes from the 2 coaches.

But let's look at the 5 players I have looked at so far, and how many 10's they got. Then I will explain my thoughts on bias.

Daicos 2024 5 x 10
Daicos 2023 3 x 10
Cripps 2024 4 x 10
Martin 2017 8 x 10
Heeney 2024 3 x 10
Butters 2023 7 x 10

When both coaches give the same amount of votes to a player, this really suggests no bias, because the players coach & the opposition team coach are in agreement. So 10's should by definition be the perfect example of unbiased voting. Every amount below 10 it is possible that a coach has been biased to a player. But this can work both ways as well. Votes can be biased for you, and also against you.

Consider this match below, at the pointy end of last season.

Cripps got 5 + 4 votes.
Pendlebury 4+2 votes.
Daicos 5+0 votes.
Hewett 3+0
Cameron 3+0
Howe 2+0
Moore & Weitering both 1+0.

There is disgreement everywhere. No player got the same votes from both coaches. But Cripps was the closest & Daicos the furthest from agreement between the coaches. It is very tough to figure out who is being unfair to who here. So we look for patterns. There seems to be a pattern of higher disagreement between the coaches where Daicos is concerned compared to others. We can draw more conclusions about this the further we look into it. But where there is pattern of greater disagreement in a player's votes compared to other player's votes, the logical conclusion is this is more likely to be caused by his own coach being biased towards him than opposition coaches being biased against him. This is because the former requires just one person to be disproportionately biased, where the latter would require an array of dissasociated people to be similarly biased against the one player.

But let's get some more data, and see what picture it paints. I think we may find some interesting trends.



1742828212930.png
 
Last edited:
Powerade 08 said:
Great thread.

He was leading by a fair margin before his leg injury in round 19. its a complete joke.

Their own BnF votes tell a different story. He finished equal second with Maynard.
Click to expand...
By how many votes was he leading the Brownlow by before his leg injury?

Let me guess - McRae biases the Brownlow votes too?

And you do realise club B&F voting uses a very different system to the 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 of the AFLCA Coaches Award?
 
Meteoric Rise said:
Discrepancies cannot occur where a player receives maximum votes(10) that is correct.

It is possible discrepancies can occur at every amount of votes below the maximum. Every odd number of votes is a certain discrepancy. Every even number below 10 is possibility to result from disparate votes from the 2 coaches.

But let's look at the 5 players I have looked at so far, and how many 10's they got. Then I will explain my thoughts on bias.

Daicos 2024 5 x 10
Daicos 2023 3 x 10
Cripps 2024 4 x 10
Martin 2017 8 x 10
Heeney 2024 3 x 10
Butters 2023 7 x 10

When both coaches give the same amount of votes to a player, this really suggests no bias, because the players coach & the opposition team coach are in agreement. So 10's should by definition be the perfect example of unbiased voting. Every amount below 10 it is possible that a coach has been bised to a player. But this can work both ways as well. Votes can be biased for you, and also against you.

Consider this match below, at the pointy end of last season.

Cripps got 5 + 4 votes.
Pendlebury 4+2 votes.
Daicos 5+0 votes.
Hewett 3+0
Cameron 3+0
Howe 2+0
Moore & Weitering both 1+0.

There is disgreement everywhere. No player got the same votes from both coaches. But Cripps was the closest & Daicos the furthest from agreement between the coaches. It is very tough to figure out who is being unfair to who here. So we look for patterns. There seems to be a pattern of higher disagreement between the coaches where Daicos is concerned compared to others. We can draw more conclusions about this the further we look into it. But where there is pattern of greater disagreement in a player's votes compared to other player's votes, the logical conclusion is this is more likely to be caused by his own coach being biased towards him than opposition coaches being biased against him. This is because the former requires just one person to be disproportionately biased, where the latter would require an array of dissasociated people to be similarly biased against the one player.

But let's get some more data, and see what picture it paints. I think we may find some interesting trends.



View attachment 2260270
Click to expand...
Thanks for highlighting Voss' clear bias against Daicos.

Daicos received 2 x Brownlow votes in that game.

The things coaches do to skew the award in favour of their own player - in this case, Cripps.
 
Meteoric Rise said:
Discrepancies cannot occur where a player receives maximum votes(10) that is correct.

It is possible discrepancies can occur at every amount of votes below the maximum. Every odd number of votes is a certain discrepancy. Every even number below 10 is possibility to result from disparate votes from the 2 coaches.

But let's look at the 5 players I have looked at so far, and how many 10's they got. Then I will explain my thoughts on bias.

Daicos 2024 5 x 10
Daicos 2023 3 x 10
Cripps 2024 4 x 10
Martin 2017 8 x 10
Heeney 2024 3 x 10
Butters 2023 7 x 10

When both coaches give the same amount of votes to a player, this really suggests no bias, because the players coach & the opposition team coach are in agreement. So 10's should by definition be the perfect example of unbiased voting. Every amount below 10 it is possible that a coach has been bised to a player. But this can work both ways as well. Votes can be biased for you, and also against you.

Consider this match below, at the pointy end of last season.

Cripps got 5 + 4 votes.
Pendlebury 4+2 votes.
Daicos 5+0 votes.
Hewett 3+0
Cameron 3+0
Howe 2+0
Moore & Weitering both 1+0.

There is disgreement everywhere. No player got the same votes from both coaches. But Cripps was the closest & Daicos the furthest from agreement between the coaches. It is very tough to figure out who is being unfair to who here. So we look for patterns. There seems to be a pattern of higher disagreement between the coaches where Daicos is concerned compared to others. We can draw more conclusions about this the further we look into it. But where there is pattern of greater disagreement in a player's votes compared to other player's votes, the logical conclusion is this is more likely to be caused by his own coach being biased towards him than opposition coaches being biased against him. This is because the former requires just one person to be disproportionately biased, where the latter would require an array of dissasociated people to be similarly biased against the one player.

But let's get some more data, and see what picture it paints. I think we may find some interesting trends.



View attachment 2260270
Click to expand...
You keep going back to “a difference in votes below a perfect score” means a coach has been biased.
When coaches have different information at their disposal to judge on. Just like the media does. And the umpires do. And the club BnFs do. And BF fans supporting and hating different teams do.

They’re all different awards. And they’re all subtly flawed (without deliberate bias) in their own way. The umpires towards midfielders. Clubs towards consistency. The media towards Vic clubs. BF fans against Collingwood even! Maybe look if one award continually is an outlier to what the rest of the awards decide. I’d suspect it’s not the coaches award. But the data is the best arbiter of that.
 
I like this thread.

What you’re saying is if McRae is giving Daicos the minimum possible votes, he should’ve won the award last year by 23 more votes than he ultimately did?

Dominant
 
bzparkes said:
David King brought this up on SEN the other day and said he'll be tracking McRae's votes for Daicos for the rest of the year.

It's not just you noticing OP.
Click to expand...
Or... it will highlight biases AGAINST Daicos.

Regardless of how many votes he's received from the respective coaches, does anyone have an issue with him receiving 5 votes in round 1, and 8 votes in round 2?

Maybe McRae is doing the right thing by his player by compensating for the bias AGAINST him?
 
Fadge said:
Or... it will highlight biases AGAINST Daicos.

Regardless of how many votes he's received from the respective coaches, does anyone have an issue with him receiving 5 votes in round 1, and 8 votes in round 2?

Maybe McRae is doing the right thing by his player by compensating for the bias AGAINST him?
Click to expand...
Had no idea deliberate OOBs in the last minute of a close game were worth coaches votes.
 
Fadge said:
Or... it will highlight biases AGAINST Daicos.

Regardless of how many votes he's received from the respective coaches, does anyone have an issue with him receiving 5 votes in round 1, and 8 votes in round 2?

Maybe McRae is doing the right thing by his player by compensating for the bias AGAINST him?
Click to expand...
Hilarious grasping at straws but if you go and listen to it, he talks about how Daicos clearly gets 5 votes in games when other players performed better, then questioned if there's financial incentives around it.

Please don't suggest something so ridiculous ever again.
 

Coach maximum Discrepant Anomalies In Coach OpinionS Index(D.A.I.C.Os index)

Similar threads

PerthBoy86
Showing coaches during the game - the discrepancy
Replies
18
Views
590
Delisted
Delisted
GC2015
  • Poll
Opinion Is Essendon currently in a rebuilding phase?
Replies
4
Views
267
SSSSSS
SSSSSS
Cleric
Opinion Where does Izak Rankine fit in the best player ratings?
Replies
4
Views
251
Cleric
Cleric
parano1a
Opinion Bring back Match Ratio
Replies
8
Views
624
Walshawk
Walshawk
Cleric
Opinion What was the most hostile Victorian suburban ground in the old days?
2 3 4 5
Replies
106
Views
4K
Pancakes
P
Cleric
Opinion Most valuable position on the field?
Replies
22
Views
532
Rotayjay
Rotayjay
GC2015
  • Poll
Opinion Are the Demons heading for finals or bottom 10 in 2025?
2 3 4
Replies
94
Views
3K
Seattle Mariners
S
Back
Top