Roast Problem with the Gary Ayres medal for best finals player.

[Samdogg]

Macrae should throw his medal in the bin. A nothing award.

Swan should also throw his Brownlow out. Worthless rubbish.

 

[adammania9]

Swan should also throw his Brownlow out. Worthless rubbish.

You're upset

 

[Samdogg]

You're upset

I mean, I'd still rather lose a Grand Final than have my club trade their future first pick, proceed to finish second bottom of the ladder while paying 400k a year to a player on another team to play in the Grand Final.

 

[Jcpdragonx]

The award is fine, the scoring is a complete embarassement for a league as big as the AFL.Can be fixed by scoring:

Qualifying finals win = * votes by 1 (no change)
Qualfying finals loss = * votes by .5
Semi final win or loss = * votes by .5
Prelim and GF * votes by 1

Now Macrae can only get 30 votes instead of 40, same as Tracc.

 

[demondavey]

A lot of people?

Considering the amount of hype the award gets, along with the fact that it's constantly used in debates comparing players, I'd say it's a far more worthy subject of scrutiny than the Gary Ayres award.

But we aren’t talking about the Brownlow, are we?

 

[demondavey]

I mean, I'd still rather lose a Grand Final than have my club trade their future first pick, proceed to finish second bottom of the ladder while paying 400k a year to a player on another team to play in the Grand Final.

You’d rather lose a GF than offload a bloke that squids it up when it matters?

 

[Samdogg]

You’d rather lose a GF than offload a bloke that squids it up when it matters?

Can't be worse than Nathan Jones's miserable career.

 

[blitzer]

The criteria is a bit dodgy if some players can have a maximum of 4 games and other players even making the GF can only have a maximum of 3.
My solution would be simply take your best 3 scores. You'd still have a bit of an advantage playing 4 games (as an extra bite at the cherry) but it'd be more reasonable and is simple.

In this case Macrae still would have won it under the above criteria.

I don't agree with arguments saying it doesn't matter etc - if you're gonna have it, at least try to make it somewhat equitable even if its not totally perfect.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

Not sure it's a problem if a player plays more finals due to losing the first one, as they are a decent chance of not getting votes for that game anyway. Consecutive wins to the grand final from 5th-8th is a great effort and getting good votes from those games means you should be in the frame for the award..

 

[Ron The Bear]

Total Ayres votes

Votes	Player	Finals
79	Martin, Dustin	12
34	Macrae, Jack	10
30	Duncan, Mitch	14
29	Shuey, Luke	9
28	Kennedy, Josh P.	7
28	Dangerfield, Patrick	16
27	Houli, Bachar	12
26	Sidebottom, Steele	6
26	Adams, Taylor	8
26	Whitfield, Lachie	12
25	Heeney, Isaac	8
25	Selwood, Joel	16
23	Petracca, Christian	6
23	Oliver, Clayton	6
23	Daniel, Caleb	9
22	Edwards, Shane	12
21	Ward, Callan	9
20	Greene, Toby	11
20	Cameron, Charlie	11
19	Coniglio, Stephen	9
19	Bontempelli, Marcus	10
19	Hawkins, Tom	15

 

[tigerbrett]

Total Ayres votes

Votes	Player	Finals
79	Martin, Dustin	12
34	Macrae, Jack	10
30	Duncan, Mitch	14
29	Shuey, Luke	9
28	Kennedy, Josh P.	7
28	Dangerfield, Patrick	16
27	Houli, Bachar	12
26	Sidebottom, Steele	6
26	Adams, Taylor	8
26	Whitfield, Lachie	12
25	Heeney, Isaac	8
25	Selwood, Joel	16
23	Petracca, Christian	6
23	Oliver, Clayton	6
23	Daniel, Caleb	9
22	Edwards, Shane	12
21	Ward, Callan	9
20	Greene, Toby	11
20	Cameron, Charlie	11
19	Coniglio, Stephen	9
19	Bontempelli, Marcus	10
19	Hawkins, Tom	15

Wow that certainly shows Dusty’s finals dominance. An average nearing 7. Next best average 3-4. Incredible

 

[master bate]

Just a completely nonsense award.

Dusty dominated it because he was Richmond's clear number 1 most dominant player - and the leagues too. But he didn't need a made up award for everyone to know that.

Melbourne dominate 3 finals but Oliver, Gawn and Petracca split the 3 best on grounds.

Petracca was 2nd best on to Gawn and Oliver. Oliver carves up Brisbane. Gawn kicks 5 against the Cats. There's almost nothing he could or would do any different to get more votes.

 

[adammania9]

I mean, I'd still rather lose a Grand Final than have my club trade their future first pick, proceed to finish second bottom of the ladder while paying 400k a year to a player on another team to play in the Grand Final.

Very, very upset. Don’t worry sweetheart you’ll get over it

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Not even sure why it exists. How can you say who was the best individual when across a series of games when the players played 1, 2, 3 or 4 games?

And the best performed team plays 3 games rather than 4?

It doesn’t make sense. Stupid concept.

 

[Samdogg]

Very, very upset. Don’t worry sweetheart you’ll get over it

Meanwhile you'll have to wait another 4 years until your club is no longer paying Adam Treloar to pay for us.

 

[adammania9]

Meanwhile you'll have to wait another 4 years until your club is no longer paying Adam Treloar to pay for us.

Bulldogs supporters like to pretend Treloar plays for them for free. You’ve got him for 4 more years on bulk cash. I’ve watched his whole career; he doesn’t have 40 games left in those legs.

Good luck but, hopefully it won’t take another 55 years to make your next granny like it did after your last loss

 

[Samdogg]

Bulldogs supporters like to pretend Treloar plays for them for free. You’ve got him for 4 more years on bulk cash. I’ve watched his whole career; he doesn’t have 40 games left in those legs.

Good luck but, hopefully it won’t take another 55 years to make your next granny like it did after your last loss

We're paying 500k a year for a guy who had a mostly great year outside his ankle injury, and kicked 3 goals in a Grand Final. Your club is paying him 300k for the next 4 years. Are you seriously dumb enough to think this is a bad deal for us?

We're going to be serious contenders for the next 5-7 years. Your club is going to be in the bottom 6 for that period, while paying 300k for a player you don't have, $1 million a year for Brodie Grundy until 2027, and missing out on pick 2 this year because you thought you were contenders.

I wouldn't be trolling other clubs if I were you.

 

[adammania9]

We're paying 500k a year for a guy who had a mostly great year outside his ankle injury, and kicked 3 goals in a Grand Final. Your club is paying him 300k for the next 4 years. Are you seriously dumb enough to think this is a bad deal for us?

We're going to be serious contenders for the next 5-7 years. Your club is going to be in the bottom 6 for that period, while paying 300k for a player you don't have, $1 million a year for Brodie Grundy until 2027, and missing out on pick 2 this year because you thought you were contenders.

I wouldn't be trolling other clubs if I were you.

We pay your players to play for you and you still fall criminally short. Maybe we can lend you some forwards, or Treloar can kick 16 goals in next year’s granny to make up the difference.

Your club would give up a hell of a lot to have a player like Grundy on its list. Your ruck stocks are Martin (lol) and English (HAHA) and unsurprisingly they were trounced on the big stage. Gawn and Jackson supplied Oliver and Trac with all the chances they needed to dominate clearances, and blokes like Treloar, Smith and Dunkley stood there twiddling their thumbs rather than apply any defensive effort

 

[Ando727]

Just get rid if the game-by-game scoring and vote for the best finals player at the end of the finals series. Sometimes "the vibe" is the best indicator. It's the same as voting for the Norm Smith, but for all finals. It's the overall impact. Trying to add numerical integrity to an opinion is folly.

 

[Samdogg]

We pay your players to play for you and you still fall criminally short. Maybe we can lend you some forwards, or Treloar can kick 16 goals in next year’s granny to make up the difference.

Your club would give up a hell of a lot to have a player like Grundy on its list. Your ruck stocks are Martin (lol) and English (HAHA) and unsurprisingly they were trounced on the big stage. Gawn and Jackson supplied Oliver and Trac with all the chances they needed to dominate clearances, and blokes like Treloar, Smith and Dunkley stood there twiddling their thumbs rather than apply any defensive effort

I don't understand why you're so keen to troll a club that played in a Grand Final while yours is in the dumpster. Seems a bit puzzling.

 

[demondavey]

We're paying 500k a year for a guy who had a mostly great year outside his ankle injury, and kicked 3 goals in a Grand Final. Your club is paying him 300k for the next 4 years. Are you seriously dumb enough to think this is a bad deal for us?

We're going to be serious contenders for the next 5-7 years. Your club is going to be in the bottom 6 for that period, while paying 300k for a player you don't have, $1 million a year for Brodie Grundy until 2027, and missing out on pick 2 this year because you thought you were contenders.

I wouldn't be trolling other clubs if I were you.

Contenders for 5-7 years?

 

[demondavey]

We get it. A particular Bulldogs supporter wants to reaffirm its relevance as a WB player won it. It’s a rubbish award with no logic to it. The only people defending it are WB supporters.

 

[Partridge]

Geelong's B&F is weighted to only include a player's top 18 (or so) games for the season - so players who miss a game or two though injury aren't disadvantaged compared to a teammate who plays all 22. Tom Stewart missed our two H&A games this season and he will absolutely benefit from this when he romps home the B&F.

Perhaps the Gary Ayres award should only factor in a maximum of three finals per player so players like Macrae this year / Dusty last year don't benefit by virtue of an extra game? If a player like Macrae polled in all 4 finals, maybe only the three higher polling games could be counted in the tally? As you point out, if this was in place this season Petracca would have won due to higher average votes per game.

Which is absolutely ridiculous, but for a different discussion.

So you missed a few games? Tough. Ablett would definitely have the 2008 Best and Fairest then; he narrowly lost to Joel Corey. Ablett missed 4 games; Corey missed none. That's how it goes.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

OP here and glad this has sparked a discussion.
As far as the discussion goes for the overall merit of the award, I didn't mean to imply that I thought the award carried a particular weight to it. But just because isn't highly regarded doesn't mean it can't be improved, and a failure to do so could lead to it continuing to be poorly regarded.

I think the failure for this award to really catch on with the public shows that you can't just create an award and expect it to means something. The Norm Smith is right up there with the Brownlow and Coleman as meaningful awards, and is the newest of those three. The overlap with Gary Ayres award can't help.

To play devils advocate though-does anyone older than me recall how the Norm Smith was perceived in the 1980s? Was there a reaction to Maurice Rioli getting it in a losing side in 82?? Did people care who the fourth or fifth ones went to? Perhaps the Garys Ayres medal will gain some relevancy over time, but is to new to register right now (FWIW I don't actually think this will be the case, but just feel like being contrarian).

 

[Ron The Bear]

To play devils advocate though-does anyone older than me recall how the Norm Smith was perceived in the 1980s?

The status of the Norm Smith has definitely grown over time. In contrast the leading goalkicker battle was quite prominent even before the Coleman was introduced (1981) and is probably less so today. You would always see the scores, ladder and leading goalkicker table on the Saturday news.