-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Opinions on whether Adam Goodes deserved two charlies ?
- Thread starter d3rm13
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Gosh, there are some absolute twits on this thread.
Goodes is an incredible player who is near impossible to match up on. He has unstoppable highs and patches of lows - not nearly as consistent as Chris Judd et al. But does that make him not a worthy winner? Hardly! The Brownlow is all about stringing a 10-13 good to great games in a single season. Goodes easily met that criteria.
If you don't rate him, why don't you ask another champion in Chris Judd what he thinks of Goodes. Maybe you'll rate his opinion - unbelievable
.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/afl/judd-on-goodes/2007/03/27/1174761469594.html
Goodes is an incredible player who is near impossible to match up on. He has unstoppable highs and patches of lows - not nearly as consistent as Chris Judd et al. But does that make him not a worthy winner? Hardly! The Brownlow is all about stringing a 10-13 good to great games in a single season. Goodes easily met that criteria.
If you don't rate him, why don't you ask another champion in Chris Judd what he thinks of Goodes. Maybe you'll rate his opinion - unbelievable
.http://www.smh.com.au/news/afl/judd-on-goodes/2007/03/27/1174761469594.html
goblues1976
Debutant
How Could Goodes Have Two And A True Star Like Juddy Only Have One???
Coming from a West Coast supporter take something from this; a very good player, not quite sure if he was the best over the two years that he won, but he has certainly been a very good player for many years, weather or not he deserved to win in the two years that he did is questionalbe, he was a flashly player in a stock standard hard working team so he is likely to show up a bit more than normal with the votes. This fact couples with him being one of the most flashy players in the AFL means that he is always going to get votes. Players like Glass and Cox getting so few votes in '06 shows the system is flawed but is the best we can hope for. Get used to it. Quite obviously the umpires chose him as the best so that can't be argued. Fairest is a question about him though, he has got off with some things that other players wouldn't have but that is to be expected with the joke that is the tribunual. Best, maybe. Fairest probably not, but he did win a brownlow and thats what matters, don't question it.
Well obviously because the umpires during the games thought that Goodes was more outstanding over the other players on the park in the years he one...it's not a conspiracy, simply logic.
You could argue that the evenness of Sydney's other players across the team sheet makes Goodes stand out even more, but that's hardly saying Goodes isn't an elite match winning performer.
raskolnikov
Hall of Famer
Veteran
10k Posts
30k Posts
Wordler
Werewolf Player
Essendon Player Sponsor 2021 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Essendon Player Sponsor 2020 - Orazio Fantasia, Anthony McDonald Tipungwuti, Shaun McKernan
Essendon Player Sponsor 2019 - Orazio Fantasia, Anthony McDonald Tipungwuti, Shaun McKernan
Wow. One Essendon supporter posted a reply in the whole thread and you chose to pick out that one.
Goodes did and didn't deserve to win two. He is a gun and champion of the game and people who are saying otherwise are idiots. On the other hand did he deserve two when other greats of the game haven't won one? Probably not. But then again nor did Robert Harvey.
Robert Harvey
Tony Lockett
the players you named have not won a rising star or premiship which was on the original list so therefore your wrong
both great players though especially lockett at sydney
yes and how could lethal and god never have won one but harvey ,crawford,judd,cousins actually any one who has won one got a medal and those 2 dont....nobody saying medal correct but to say someone dosent deserve it is just stupid
It's an umpires' award. In 2 seasons the umpires awarded him more votes than anyone else. Therefore he deserves two Brownlows. Not hard to work that out, surely?
I don't care because I regard the Brownlow as a token award, Nobody plays for it, it's just something that happens to you as your career unfolds. It's an anachronism with very little significance that has been elevated far beyond its worth.
I don't care because I regard the Brownlow as a token award, Nobody plays for it, it's just something that happens to you as your career unfolds. It's an anachronism with very little significance that has been elevated far beyond its worth.
I gotta agree with this, although, historically, its a huge award to win! I think the MVP award is very underated, to be chosen by your peers would be a huge honour!
- Mar 23, 2007
- 34,932
- 23,542
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Man U, Canucks and 49ers
The fact Goodes has two shows how flawed the system is.
To be fair to Goodes, you could use the 'flawed system' argument about every winner, not just him!
Hird, buckly, riccuito. those guys all have one brownlow. and goodes as 2
Sure it is.
They were brilliant players but only had 1 year where the umpires felt they were good enough in each game to warrant enough consistent votes to win the award.
Goodes has had 2 years.
Not hard to understand.
It's not a reflection of their careers, it's a reflection of select years.
This list is just proof that the Brownlow is meaningless. How many of these players won the brownlow in the same year? I will take the AFLPA MVP over the Brownlow any day of the week.
As for Goodes, who cares if he has 2 awards given to him by a couple of technicolur gnomes that have no idea.
If Goodes were @ Port your mob might actually be able to string a couple of wins together.
Brownlow voting is so flawed (as is most media best player voting) it's difficult to know where to start.
Best Player in each game gets same number of votes. But the medal is meant to compare players in all games. BOG Player A of Game B could've had a heaps better game than BOG Player C of Game D but they both end up with 3 votes when Player A should've got proportionally a higher rating/more votes.
Players get 3,2,1 votes in a game. So the second best player gets 100% more votes than the third best player, but did he play 100% better???? Not a chance. The first best gets 200% more votes,.... 200% better, no way. Need a better vote allocation system the better reflects how good a player has played in relation to the rest of the players in that round.
Not surprisingly with a crappy voting system like that I'm not surprised it throws up some incosistent results (putting aside opinions who and how should be allocating votes).
Goodes is a bit of an enigma in that he rarely puts together a strong consistent full season. Like a lot of Swans of the last 5 or 6 years he's tended to put in a slow start to the year no doubt leading to a number of comments in this thread from opposition supporters who only see him play once or twice a year in those crappy games.
However of course his best is unstoppable, speed, strength, ball getting, marking, and he's shown a fair whack of it since '03 (particularly sticking out head and shoulders above a very even (talent wise) Swans side) to score the two medals. I get howled down when I compare him to Kouta's best year or two but he's got that very rare all round speed, height and skill package. No doubt he's a had a few (pretty minor/soft IMO) disciplinry issues in dealing with tags in recent years but he definately deserves at least one medal.
Best Player in each game gets same number of votes. But the medal is meant to compare players in all games. BOG Player A of Game B could've had a heaps better game than BOG Player C of Game D but they both end up with 3 votes when Player A should've got proportionally a higher rating/more votes.
Players get 3,2,1 votes in a game. So the second best player gets 100% more votes than the third best player, but did he play 100% better???? Not a chance. The first best gets 200% more votes,.... 200% better, no way. Need a better vote allocation system the better reflects how good a player has played in relation to the rest of the players in that round.
Not surprisingly with a crappy voting system like that I'm not surprised it throws up some incosistent results (putting aside opinions who and how should be allocating votes).
Goodes is a bit of an enigma in that he rarely puts together a strong consistent full season. Like a lot of Swans of the last 5 or 6 years he's tended to put in a slow start to the year no doubt leading to a number of comments in this thread from opposition supporters who only see him play once or twice a year in those crappy games.
However of course his best is unstoppable, speed, strength, ball getting, marking, and he's shown a fair whack of it since '03 (particularly sticking out head and shoulders above a very even (talent wise) Swans side) to score the two medals. I get howled down when I compare him to Kouta's best year or two but he's got that very rare all round speed, height and skill package. No doubt he's a had a few (pretty minor/soft IMO) disciplinry issues in dealing with tags in recent years but he definately deserves at least one medal.
- Banned
- #169
The Brownlow Medal recognises the stand-out players, not necessarily the best.
Adam Goodes is one of the best receivers to ever pull on a boot and I mean that in the sincerest, nicest, possible way.
He is a huge man with a big tank, beautiful balance, beautiful skills, quite unstoppable really.
When he gets in the right mood, he blows everyone else away.
Brownlow Medals are generally awarded to those who stand out, those who hang on to the ball, run the lines and break games open single-handedly. They have to be consistent enough to do so over 10 or 11 games in the season.
Goodes fits this description, probably better than anyone in the game.
When Goodes won in 2003, he was fully deserving. He played as a roving ruckman and was dominant in many games.
Similar story in 2006. Judd was the season's MVP and Scott West was Brownlow favourite, but Goodes was a worthy winner. Goodes had a far bigger impact on games than West. Judd was probably better over 22 games, but Goodes was possibly better in the 10 or 11 games which count.
I don't think that Goodes is the best footballer in the game. But at times, he is the most dynamic footballer and this allows him to accumulate BOGs from the umpires.
They say the Brownlow Medal is for the "best and fairest" but this is a misleading description. Take it with a grain of salt. A footballer does not have to be fair, merely avoid getting himself reported & suspended. The best footballers play well in all games. They aren't hot and cold. It's possible to win a Brownlow if you play 11 shockers and 11 rippers.
Should we chnage the voting system for the Brownlow?
Well, that's another story... (In my opinion, no, leave it alone)
Adam Goodes is one of the best receivers to ever pull on a boot and I mean that in the sincerest, nicest, possible way.
He is a huge man with a big tank, beautiful balance, beautiful skills, quite unstoppable really.
When he gets in the right mood, he blows everyone else away.
Brownlow Medals are generally awarded to those who stand out, those who hang on to the ball, run the lines and break games open single-handedly. They have to be consistent enough to do so over 10 or 11 games in the season.
Goodes fits this description, probably better than anyone in the game.
When Goodes won in 2003, he was fully deserving. He played as a roving ruckman and was dominant in many games.
Similar story in 2006. Judd was the season's MVP and Scott West was Brownlow favourite, but Goodes was a worthy winner. Goodes had a far bigger impact on games than West. Judd was probably better over 22 games, but Goodes was possibly better in the 10 or 11 games which count.
I don't think that Goodes is the best footballer in the game. But at times, he is the most dynamic footballer and this allows him to accumulate BOGs from the umpires.
They say the Brownlow Medal is for the "best and fairest" but this is a misleading description. Take it with a grain of salt. A footballer does not have to be fair, merely avoid getting himself reported & suspended. The best footballers play well in all games. They aren't hot and cold. It's possible to win a Brownlow if you play 11 shockers and 11 rippers.
Should we chnage the voting system for the Brownlow?
Well, that's another story... (In my opinion, no, leave it alone)
Here is your list of Brownlow Medallist's who won the AFLPA award in the same year:
1987 - Tony Lockett (St Kilda)
1988 - Gerard Healy (Sydney)
1991 - Jim Stynes (Melbourne)
1994 - Greg Williams (Carlton)
1996 - Corey McKernan (North Melbourne) *
1997 - Robert Harvey (St Kilda)
1999 - Shane Crawford (Hawthorn)
2005 - Ben Cousins (West Coast)
* - Ineligible, but equal highest votes in Brownlow.
I think you could say each of them were clearly the outstanding player for their respective 'winning year'.
grimlock
Hall of Famer
Wouldn't mind putting a few dollars on Goodes winning a third. In 2007, he racked up 20 votes (all of his votes) after Round 12. He definitely polls well with the umpires.
With Goodes ineligible for the Brownlow, again, I'd hold onto those dollars. 2 years in a row now Goodes has been ineligible for the Charlie, I'd expect to see him get rubbed out next year aswell. He wouldn't get near Ablett anyway, this years one is all but gift wrapped for him.
- Banned
- #174
Yep, he's a gun. I know people hate watching Sydney play but honestly this guy is so underrated by the public and BF that it's a joke.
He may even get a third someday.
He may even get a third someday.
Was on track for a 3rd this year except for some BS soft report.
Similar threads
