Why is that?Why should they be close?
Surely an umpire and a coach would ha e very different criteria for what constitutes being the 'best' player in the ground?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Why is that?Why should they be close?
Surely an umpire and a coach would ha e very different criteria for what constitutes being the 'best' player in the ground?
Take the voting away from the Umps already. Who gives a stuff about tradition, they just get it wrong.
Hogan had some excellent games, but didn’t have as many great games as Cripps or Daicos. It’s not just the Brownlow that goes to midfielders, it’s also coaches award, peer award and every other media award all go to midfielders because they are the most influential players in the team. It’s not since Carey has the best player in the comp not been a midfielder, Gawn perhaps but still played mid.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.
Massive difference if you apply some grey matter.The problem is people equating record votes to record year.
It doesn't mean that.
Cripps polled 29 votes when he won in 2022 (and played 3 less games). Walsh polled 30 in 2021 when he came equal 4th.
The votes from one year to the next are simply not comparable in any way.
Before it was 25-30 that would win it, you could win it with 20-25 votes. Players have won it with sub 20 votes.
So this year Cripps polled 45 votes from 24 games (1.875 per game). In 1940, Herbie Matthews and Des Fothergill tied on 32 votes from 18 games (1.778 per game). Not much of a difference.
Because a coach has a plan that involves 22 players playing their role as instructed.Why is that?
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?
You really just put intelligent and Kane Cornes in the same sentence?
Thats a fair summary. I've been told the umps have little earpieces and they have a coach who whispers encouragement to them during the game, is this the case? Talk about taking interference too far.Not so much that, but think back to when the award was inaugurated.
1924. A full century ago. The game was much, much, slower. Only one umpire, who probably could make a decent fist of working out who the best player was, as there weren't nearly so many rules nor so much going on in the game itself. I don't know what kind of reporting there was, but I'd be pretty confident it wasn't 24/7 saturation of absolute garbage that it is now.
Today with the modern game, it's light years apart. Too many umpires, too many rules and far, far too many interpretations, and the creep of what the umpires actually do (some of it self-inflicted) has made the decision of working out the best players just about impossible.
Respect for the umpires would return if they returned to just umpiring. Not offering advice, not being their junior coach, just umpire. Most fans would be happy with that instantly.
The point of the coaches vote and the Brownlow is to identify who played the best, the umpires and the coaches are both doing that, from slightly different perspectives. You are correct, a coach may not reward a stat stuffer who was hacking the ball forward against the gameplan (and we'd all argue they shouldn't).Because a coach has a plan that involves 22 players playing their role as instructed.
Players don't just go out and play. They go out and do what the coach tells them to do.
We don't know what that is. Umpires don't.
From a coach's perspective, a guy playing an important defensive role perfectly could make him the best player on the ground - whereas the rest of us might think they've been quiet.
A guy could get 25 kicks but break team rules with each one. Most people would think they've been good - but the coach wouldn't.
The main reason that it is a terrible idea to have umpires vote isn't because they get it wrong, but because, as we've already seen, there is a massive risk of gambling corruption.
You are introducing a way in which officials could become compromised by organized crime that shouldn't exist at all. There is absolutely no need to open this risk up whatsoever. Officials shouldn't have anything to with gambling markets beyond the outcome itself. It's far too easy to manipulate.
This competition is the biggest bush league in the world. There are so many amatuer aspects to it, it's unbelievable.
Harley Reid and Naicos trading Charlies for a decade incoming.When the media constantly bombards you with how good Daicos, Cripps, Heeney or whoever are surely this influences the umpires.
Champion Data had Cripps winning.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.
It’s not since Carey has the best player in the comp not been a midfielder, Gawn perhaps but still played mid.
The Norm Smith is a more prestigious award than the Brownlow.
You can debate Norm Smith voting all you like but you not winning the award if you have a stinker, I can tell you that.
Cripps deserved it, but not the amount of votes both him & Daicos polled way too many.Norm Smith is a better guide to BOG in a particular game but it is one game. You can argue that Cripps got some soft votes but you can’t argue he didn’t have a great season and that is harder to pull off than one game.
Riewoldt in 2004/05 probably regarded as best in game. Buddy in 08. Even this year Cameron was at times called best in AFL.
It is not just recently that KPs have been ignored by umpires. A few ruckman have won it in 60s and 70s. Plugger is only KPF. Not sure a KPD had ever won it.
It is a flawed award, but so is the draw, so is the draft, so are the trading rules.
The Brownlow quirkiness is a minor issue in the game. Most educated supporters put higher value on MVP and coaches award.