Roast The Brownlow has no credibility left

[GroggSquad]

45 was a lot of votes however anyone who watches Carlton knows that in almost every game this year our captain was our best player.. the only exception is prob the GWS game where TDK was clearly BOG, but Cripps would still have been top 3.

It’s a midfielders award, but the mids are the best players. Especially in an era when players are not kicking 100+ goals.

If you want to pick a Brownlow with no credibility it’s last years, when Max Gawn was clearly the best player in the comp but didn’t get close.. This year Cripps, Daicos & Heeney have clearly been the top players, some would also have Bont but I disagree on that..

Yeah I prefer Bont's scoreboard impact over Cripps' handballs at stoppages personally.

Hilarious this meme medal had 26 votes between them

 

[greatwhiteshark]

45 was a lot of votes however anyone who watches Carlton knows that in almost every game this year our captain was our best player.. the only exception is prob the GWS game where TDK was clearly BOG, but Cripps would still have been top 3.

It’s a midfielders award, but the mids are the best players. Especially in an era when players are not kicking 100+ goals.

If you want to pick a Brownlow with no credibility it’s last years, when Max Gawn was clearly the best player in the comp but didn’t get close.. This year Cripps, Daicos & Heeney have clearly been the top players, some would also have Bont but I disagree on that..

I agree with you on this except one point. The players you have mentioned have been the best midfielders of this year, not necessarily the best players. Like the umpires the media only report on the Mids. Meanwhile backman are holding good forwards to nothing and forwards are towelling up good backman.
Did Cripps have a better year than Hogan? I can argue yes and no on that answer. Hogan was sensational this year. What does he get out of his sensational year? Nothing, won't even win his clubs B & F as they are also weighted towards mids.

I am a traditionalist but if football is to be seriosu we now need to separate these awards into 3 catogories, Backs Mids, Forwards. 3 MVP, 3 Brownlows.
We simply are not awarding the best players anymore. Just the best mids.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

But doesnt it feel like the umps are giving out votes to the favourites, rather than the favourites earning the votes? Its a little bit backwards. The media annoints someone as a brownlow fave and they get votes from the umps regardless of how they play

Possibly. We can speculate on this all we like. Nobody knows. The umpires themselves may not even “know” if it’s subconscious.

But whatever the process, the umpires consistently get it quite right. The winner is invariably one of the favourites and they’re a favourite for a reason.

Even those who are mocked years later as unworthy winners… often that’s a result of their form in other seasons, which is irrelevant. When you look at what they produced in that season, it often stands up very well. Cooney is a good example of this.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Possibly. We can speculate on this all we like. Nobody knows. The umpires themselves may not even “know” if it’s subconscious.

But whatever the process, the umpires consistently get it quite right. The winner is invariably one of the favourites and they’re a favourite for a reason.

Even those who are mocked years later as unworthy winners… often that’s a result of their form in other seasons, which is irrelevant. When you look at what they produced in that season, it often stands up very well. Cooney is a good example of this.

Yes I think this is right but we have to ask why doesn't the media write up all the best players. Why hasn't Jess Hogan been talked about as a brownlow favourite for the last 10 weeks. I mean we discuss how hard it is for forwards now so anyone that kicks 60-70 goals surely is close to the best player in the comp yes?

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

The Brownlow Medal is an anachronism. It passed its use by date decades ago with its ridiculous 3-2-1 voting system. I've never understood how it has morphed into the single most prestigious individual award in football in the professional era. Afterall, it's only an umpires' award. Surely there are better credentialed people than umpires, and better methods to determine the champion player in a season.

It always amuses me to think that we criticize the standard of umpiring all season, then it's over to them to tell us who the best player is. Football deserves better than this, the Brownlow is amateur hour.

 

[PhatBoy]

This has always been the case. They’re probably biased toward superstars just like everybody else.

The point is that it’s the winner that counts, and even if the counts are higher, if they get the winner right then its not that important.

The problem is that it begins to set a precedent. That also became evident with the way heeney stopped getting votes as soon as he became ineligible.

I’m yet to see a single post from anyone saying Cripps didn’t deserve to win, the problem is that when umpires are now awarding players votes for 1-2 quarters of good football, especially in games where it didn’t even change the result, it means that in a year when the result might come down to a vote here or there, someone will invariably win when they don’t deserve to

 

[PhatBoy]

Yes I think this is right but we have to ask why doesn't the media write up all the best players. Why hasn't Jess Hogan been talked about as a brownlow favourite for the last 10 weeks. I mean we discuss how hard it is for forwards now so anyone that kicks 60-70 goals surely is close to the best player in the comp yes?

This. Top four team who got there thanks in huge part to Toby Greene and Jesse Hogan and both were bit players throughout the count: how many of their 15-16 wins were down to them?

 

[SuperSub17]

The problem is that it begins to set a precedent. That also became evident with the way heeney stopped getting votes as soon as he became ineligible.

I’m yet to see a single post from anyone saying Cripps didn’t deserve to win, the problem is that when umpires are now awarding players votes for 1-2 quarters of good football, especially in games where it didn’t even change the result, it means that in a year when the result might come down to a vote here or there, someone will invariably win when they don’t deserve to

I mean, we only have to go back one year to see where it did affect the outcome. Neale had a good, solid season in 2023 - but he should’ve been nowhere near Bontempelli.

Whole system needs an overhaul.

 

[Ted Potter]

lol. People getting so wound up over an award that we've known is laughably flawed for over a decade. There's no excuse for people to be so surprised

I warned people not to watch it. Should've listened

Err, it has been flawed throughout its whole history. Why people think this is some kind of recent thing is a mystery. All awards have flaws, the Brownlow more than most. It is its history and tradition that gives it its weight and significance. The significance belongs as much to those who are famous for not winning as much as those who have.

I think it is a wonderful award despite its flaws. And I think Patrick Cripps was a worthy winner and a great ambassador for our game.

 

[RUNVS]

I said it last night but Nick Daicos polled 2 Brownlow votes in Round 22 against Sydney when statistically (using SuperCoach anyway) he was the 28th best player on the field.

 

[Seeds]

This has always been the case. They’re probably biased toward superstars just like everybody else.

The point is that it’s the winner that counts, and even if the counts are higher, if they get the winner right then its not that important.

They got the winner right this year. Well the winner was atleast in the top 3 players this year. But not in other years.

 

[KissKiss]

Watch the AFL over correct next year and Jacob Weitering get 51 votes and Cripps get 6.

The over reaction happened plenty of times to a winner.

After Judd got the surprise win everyone thought he would go back to back, but then Swan got up. Similar Neale had a massive drop off in votes this year despite having just as good if not better year than last year.

 

[JPetro83]

Have not watched the Brownlow count since 2017. horrible viewing no made worse by the overused welcome to country thing that i read about this morning... old uncle is cleaning up the past few weeks wearing his queen vic markets made in china animal skin coat lol.
They really need to have 3 panelists to sit and judge the game and award the votes.. take it out of the umpires' hands.. players in all positions need to be able to have a crack at winning it.. not just mids.. players need to be judged on their role and how well they influence the game.. not a player who racks up 32 touches in which none of the touches are hard ball gets etc..

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Yeah I looked through the All Australian selection panel and the only three whose opinions I rate as independent and intelligent would be Buckley, Kane Cornes, and Pavlich. Don't respect the rest at all.

Watching them constantly revert to the stats sheet during their discussions is where they lose me.

Just have a Supercoach award and be done with it if it's stats that you value.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

For all the sooking and melting and hot (lukewarm) takes, I will say - the umpires don’t get it wrong very often.

It's just their opinion.

How can it be wrong? And how can it be right?

 

[kranky al]

I don't think Cripps was the best midfielder this year, plus the amount of votes he got was ridiculous, but man that take is worse then Cripps polling 40+ votes

I wouldn’t even pick him. Absolute weapon on offence but too slow and left behind on a turnover meaning your team is effectively one man down on that fast break. Means teams get overlap and one of your defenders has to leave his man and come meet the attackers.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Whole system needs an overhaul.

It's much easier to just overhaul your own perspective on the Brownlow.

Take it for what it is. It's simply 4 guys that are apparently concentrating so hard that they don't even know what the score is or how much time is left - getting together after the game and coming up with a consensus 3-2-1 of the best players on the ground. How they manage to do that is beyond me to be honest given everything else they need to focus on during a game, but they somehow do.

It's nothing more than that.

There's no need to overhaul anything.

 

[Cam Payne]

People whinge when the AFL makes changes and people whinge when the AFL keeps things the same. Imagine if there was no internet forums dedicated to those whingers.

 

[SSSSSS]

Umps don't want to do the Brownlow votes. They phone it in.

Put yourself in their shoes. You are doing this as a side gig. You've just run 15km for the last two hours. You've been berated by fans from both sides. You just want to hit the showers and get some rest.

Just pick three big names that you know of and be done with it.

 

[Cyclops]

Fair points that the system has been flawed forever. I guess we used to respect the umps abut more so we respected their decisions.

On the cherrypicked stats thing, anything from champion data is sus, and at least as bad as the poor demoralised umps.

I blame the boys club afl. How did Dillon's wife know Bont was no chance?

 

[RUNVS]

Umps don't want to do the Brownlow votes. They phone it in.

Put yourself in their shoes. You are doing this as a side gig. You've just run 15km for the last two hours. You've been berated by fans from both sides. You just want to hit the showers and get some rest.

Just pick three big names that you know of and be done with it.

It would almost be better if we allowed 3 people from Champion Data to do the award. I think they would be better at picking non-midfielders.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

It's just their opinion.

How can it be wrong? And how can it be right?

You can reach a consensus by looking at the AFLPA, AFLCA, media awards, and of course the betting market which is the sum total of every dollar placed on it.

People are carrying on like some $151 shot won.

“It has no credibility left”.

People seem to be so focussed on the tallies and margins. There’s always going to be variance there when you have so many different people voting on so many games.

Its an individual award and all that really matters is the winner. He’s the one on the board and in the books. On the most objective measures we have, he was a very credible winner. There’s a huge overreaction here.

 

[JackOutback]

The umpires aren't even trying anymore, they are just looking at the biggest names in each team's midfields and awarding them votes. Cripps is a great player, I can accept the Brownlow is a midfielder's awards, but anyone suggesting Cripps was best on ground in 15 of 23 games or among the best in almost 20 of 23 games is kidding themselves. The idea this was the greatest individual season ever seen is laughable. I don't take it seriously but it would be nice to have the most significant award for best player of the year that can be taken seriously.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

People whinge when the AFL makes changes and people whinge when the AFL keeps things the same. Imagine if there was no internet forums dedicated to those whingers.

What a strange take.

Firstly, having opinions that are negative is not necessarily whinging.

Do you not think that customers should have opinions on the product they're buying and consuming? Strange.

Secondly, do you not think they should be allowed to express those opinions in discussion with other people that are interested in the same topic/s?

And do you not think that an internet forum dedicated solely to people sharing opinions on topics that interest them isn't the ideal place for these discussions to take place?


And finally, believe it or not, people have been sharing opinions about the footy well before the internet was invented.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

You can reach a consensus by looking at the AFLPA, AFLCA, media awards, and of course the betting market which is the sum total of every dollar placed on it.

People are carrying on like some $151 shot won.

“It has no credibility left”.

People seem to be so focussed on the tallies and margins. There’s always going to be variance there when you have so many different people voting on so many games.

Its an individual award and all that really matters is the winner. He’s the one on the board and in the books. On the most objective measures we have, he was a very credible winner. There’s a huge overreaction here.

I think you are wrong, and I think that anyone who associates 'credibility' with the Brownlow are wrong.

Unless it's rigged, which it isn't, credibility has nothing to do with it.

It's an opinion award. If you asked 100 people who the 3 best players on the ground were after each game, you'd get dozens of different variations.

Doesn't mean anyone is right, or anyone is wrong.



FWIW, the one aspect of the Brownlow that I do find lacks 'credibility' (for want of a better word) is that it's a consensus 3-2-1.
Unless the 4 umpires are all in agreeance after every game, which they wouldn't be, you're not actually getting the genuine opinion of the umpires at all.

Personally, I'd like them to let each umpire give their own 3-2-1.

But do I really care? No.