Opinions on whether Adam Goodes deserved two charlies ?

Remove this Banner Ad

Adam Goodes won't be sitting side by side with Robert Harvey in the history books.

Goodes will be in the 'premiership players' section.


Yeah. Maybe a premiership player, but will never have the admiration,skills and fairness of the game Robert Harvey resembles.
 
Imo, 2003 brownlow was not deserved to be won by adam goodes, and 2006 im sure in a lot of ppls thoughts would acknowledge scott west as the more worhty brownlow medalist.
Adam Goodes is loved by the umps and that was shown when his head high contact charge was dismissed.
Supposedly, the umpires are writing an article about Adam Goodes giving excellent Headjobs prior to the matches:p:p

Sound's to me as though you are an expert on how to give excellent ones & that makes you more then over qualified when it comes to giving the opinion you just gave.:thumbsu: A qualified giver!!

You're all class!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Neither.
Just someone who has watched enough football to know an exceptional footballer when I see one. And Goodes isn't one

Can I offer some constructive advice and suggest that perhaps you haven't watched enough football. If you had, you would understand that Goodes, although unpopular at the moment, is an exceptional footballer.

2x Brownlow. 1 x Rising Star. Dream Team representative. Arguably the most valuable contributor to 1 x premiership team and 1 x runners up. Pretty impressive CV that one. And he has many years left.

Feel free to dislike the bloke, that is your perogative, but you cannot in all honesty deny that he is an outstanding footballer. End of Story.
 
I don't think we need a player like that in the list we now have. The only way I'd want him would be if he cleaned up his act and actually played like a Hird did - or a Lucas does now.

This is possibly the most naive comment I have seen on BF.

You do realise that your team plays in the AFL, not Auskick? "Cleanded up his act and played like Hird did" - You are joking aren't you? Do Essendon give out participation trophies at the end of the year as well in the spirit of fair play for all?

Essendon can't find a spot for Goodes????? My god.
 
Can I offer some constructive advice and suggest that perhaps you haven't watched enough football. If you had, you would understand that Goodes, although unpopular at the moment, is an exceptional footballer.

2x Brownlow. 1 x Rising Star. Dream Team representative. Arguably the most valuable contributor to 1 x premiership team and 1 x runners up. Pretty impressive CV that one. And he has many years left.

Feel free to dislike the bloke, that is your perogative, but you cannot in all honesty deny that he is an outstanding footballer. End of Story.

Wow, Dreamteam rep.:rolleyes:

The most important player to the swans in 05 was barry hall, he is why they won the flag.
 
Wow, Dreamteam rep.:rolleyes:

The most important player to the swans in 05 was barry hall, he is why they won the flag.

My mistake - I meant Victorian rep. Does this make it any more valid? I would argue being one of the best 22 Victorian players in the game is a fair achievement (and he would have been one of the first picked).

I disagree about Goodes vs Hall in 2005 but that is another argument.

Are you trying to say that his CV is not impressive. Put it this way, how many players in AFL history have the following on their CV:

- Rising Star
- Brownlow
- Premiership
- All Australian
- State Rep

I would think it is a very exclusive group.
 
not in my opinion, no. he runs too hot and cold for mine, and even when he is on song he does the flashy stuff that gets the umpires attention, while guys around him like kirk and bolton etc do the little things that really win you games.
 
Wow, Dreamteam rep.:rolleyes:

The most important player to the swans in 05 was barry hall, he is why they won the flag.

you cannot help yourself, can you

all this crying over barry hall playing in the 05 GF is completely irrelevant as far as st kilda and saints fans go, your season ended the weeke BEFORE the grand final

yes, hall played in the grand final after appearing at the tribunal, but the fact is he was a big part of the side that smashed your disappointing, under-achieving over-rated lot in the prelim final and you're still hurting

the grand final that year had nothing to do with your mob, whether hall played in it or not
as for whether sydney would've won had he not played, it's hypothetical, isn't it?
 
not in my opinion, no. he runs too hot and cold for mine, and even when he is on song he does the flashy stuff that gets the umpires attention, while guys around him like kirk and bolton etc do the little things that really win you games.

You could have just described Peter Matera. Do you think he was a champion?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

you cannot help yourself, can you

all this crying over barry hall playing in the 05 GF is completely irrelevant as far as st kilda and saints fans go, your season ended the weeke BEFORE the grand final

yes, hall played in the grand final after appearing at the tribunal, but the fact is he was a big part of the side that smashed your disappointing, under-achieving over-rated lot in the prelim final and you're still hurting

the grand final that year had nothing to do with your mob, whether hall played in it or not
as for whether sydney would've won had he not played, it's hypothetical, isn't it?

Yes, i acknowledged this in my post FFS, he was much more critical than goodes was to your team that year. He kick 2 in the grand final afterall didn't he?
 
In this thread title, what does the word deserved mean?

He polled the most votes, so he deserved to win.

The more pertinent question is, "What does it mean to win a Brownlow?"

The standard answer is that the Brownlow winner was the best eligible player in the league that year.

But if you think about it, that's BS.

The Brownlow winner is just one of a group of players who had an outstanding year. Sure, some years there's a stand-out who wins, but most years, it's one guy who had a good year and the numbers went his way.

Look at Goodes and Bartel.

Does anyone think either of them was the best player in the competition in the year they won?

I doubt it.

So what does it actually mean when they win the Brownlow?

Frankly, I think the AFLPA MVP does a better job of identifying the league's best player in a given year.
 
of course he does
unfortunately its a midfielders award almost exclusively

he had the highest votes for 2 years so yes he derserves them

and bit gay for all those theories as to the reason he was 'given' the award to market the game in nsw

completley and utterly stupid

im sure the umps rigged all the votes so that buckley and roo tied with goodes as well
 
My mistake - I meant Victorian rep. Does this make it any more valid? I would argue being one of the best 22 Victorian players in the game is a fair achievement (and he would have been one of the first picked).

I disagree about Goodes vs Hall in 2005 but that is another argument.

Are you trying to say that his CV is not impressive. Put it this way, how many players in AFL history have the following on their CV:

- Rising Star
- Brownlow
- Premiership
- All Australian
- State Rep

I would think it is a very exclusive group.

Take out the two brownlows and he is not in such exclusive company really.
 
He's obviously a champion player.

But I'm of the opinion that IF he played for any other side in the competition he might not have won either, well at least the first one.

He stands out in a very good team, a team where he is the sole superstar. Who have been Sydney's other chaz hopes? Jude Bolton? Brett Kirk? That about sums it up.
 
He's obviously a champion player.

But I'm of the opinion that IF he played for any other side in the competition he might not have won either, well at least the first one.

He stands out in a very good team, a team where he is the sole superstar. Who have been Sydney's other chaz hopes? Jude Bolton? Brett Kirk? That about sums it up.

so u think the umps/afl rigged it so he ended up on 21/22 votes? geeez lucky for them it was a low scoring year and bucks and roo didnt get an extra vote somewhere!
 
Take out the two brownlows and he is not in such exclusive company really.

Take out the 2 brownlows? That is like saying "take out 1992 and 1994 and Malthouse is not a good coach". Rubbish.

And by the way, if you take out the 2 x brownlows, he is still in very exclusive company (ie. he is still the only player in history to have won all of the others). You really should do your research before making stuff up.;)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Opinions on whether Adam Goodes deserved two charlies ?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top