Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
- Thread starter
- #751
I probably shouldn't have put Mitchell in my super coach team this year then. Could have sworn he's still going around...
The never ending Priddis debate - part II
- Thread starter Miguel Sanchez
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
I probably shouldn't have put Mitchell in my super coach team this year then. Could have sworn he's still going around...
Sam Mitchell was not delisted and 28 possies and a supergoal in last weeks Nab Challenge game show he is going alright...
Think you are getting mixed up with Brad Sewell.
- Jan 13, 2013
- 24,036
- 48,502
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Ahh right, that would be why we've done so well the last few years then, Priddis leads a team of elite juggernauts who've won premiership after premiership. As long as we get the umpires vote that's all that matters.
- Jan 13, 2013
- 24,036
- 48,502
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I'm a bit worried he and Hodge are going to drop off a cliff points wise one day, but then I've been thinking that for the past couple of seasons.
- Jan 13, 2013
- 24,036
- 48,502
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Or perhaps Ablett has been the best or near best player in the league for the last 8 odd years?
Bit off topic there mate.
Not sure anybody expressed a need for umpires votes.
Also not sure how that relates to your rant about elite juggernauts and multiple premierships .
- Banned
- #759
Well he did win the brownlow because he remained injury free and reported free. Either Ablett or fyfe would have won it.
Its not a detraction but a statement. That's all.
Ablett was just as fair as priddis but was injured and ablett is clearly a better player.
Strange way to look at things.
It's like saying Kennedy would have kicked three goals if he had not missed three times.
Agree Ablett is a champion and could easily have won the last six Brownlows but he didn't .
Last edited:
- Jan 13, 2013
- 24,036
- 48,502
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Why did he win then? What do you think made him the best player in the league last year?
- Banned
- #762
The award is flawed. It should be the best player. Fairest is nonsensical when Fyfe is ineligible most of last year for a nonsense offense and McKernan missed out for an even more nonsense offence.
Fairest should exclude thugs but beyond that it should be a best player award. And any competition that doesn't make allowance for players who miss a few games is ridiculous.
Our award eliminates players for marginal breaches against the rules and kills you for missing 3+ games.
GAblett was the best, the fairest and the MVP last season. No one really disputes that. Our medal is prestigious because of its history but it's diminished in that no one really knows what it stands for... It's further diminished when it's win by a guy not in the best 25 players in the game.
If we want it to remain a meaningful award over time the criteria should be adjusted. And ultimately a players relative value (in the sense of MVP) should be more significant than the nonsense that 3 votes in a meaningless late season game against, say, GWS is the same as 3 votes in a Hawks v Swans table defining Round 20 game.
Our system says both BOG's are of similar value, it's nonsense...
If the best argument people can come up with is "but it's always been that way" then frankly that's an awful argument. It was a largely amateur game, with no blanket coverage and no alternative approach rather than the umps votes in say 1930. But the world has changed. The umpires voting is a hangover from an amateur age.
Fairest should exclude thugs but beyond that it should be a best player award. And any competition that doesn't make allowance for players who miss a few games is ridiculous.
Our award eliminates players for marginal breaches against the rules and kills you for missing 3+ games.
GAblett was the best, the fairest and the MVP last season. No one really disputes that. Our medal is prestigious because of its history but it's diminished in that no one really knows what it stands for... It's further diminished when it's win by a guy not in the best 25 players in the game.
If we want it to remain a meaningful award over time the criteria should be adjusted. And ultimately a players relative value (in the sense of MVP) should be more significant than the nonsense that 3 votes in a meaningless late season game against, say, GWS is the same as 3 votes in a Hawks v Swans table defining Round 20 game.
Our system says both BOG's are of similar value, it's nonsense...
If the best argument people can come up with is "but it's always been that way" then frankly that's an awful argument. It was a largely amateur game, with no blanket coverage and no alternative approach rather than the umps votes in say 1930. But the world has changed. The umpires voting is a hangover from an amateur age.
- Banned
- #763
It's not like that at all. It's saying Kennedy would have kicked 7 goals against a certain team if he wasn't injured if his average is 7 goals against that particular team.
So you think Ablett wouldn't have won it if he wasn't injured?
Given that he finished on 22 votes in round 15? He wouldn't have got at least 5 more votes from his last 6 games?
Priddis did a bradbury..he knows it...you know it..the whole world knows. But who gives a shit, more power to him. But don't try and deny it and try to insinuate he would have won it if Fyfe wasnt suspended or Ablett injured. At best he might have finished second but probably third.
AND you have to remember that he is playing in a team that hasn't got a dominant midfield and nobody else was stealing votes off him. Not like in the top teams. If you go back to Cousins brownlow win, Kerr finished runner up IIRC. Kerr took votes off Cousins and even Judd took votes.
Priddis enjoys the sole "elite" midfielder in our team in the umpires eyes status.
In other words. All the ****ing planets aligned for him to win it.
Last edited:
Just watched the Carlton game and Matt did some particularly good things.
Despite hopefully being shown towards the door by seasons end, i'd be glad if he has a new found confidence in himself after his bradbury win. A confident player is the sort of player you want, and hopefully it improves his game, even slightly if he's taking up every minute in the midfield again.
If it comes to having either a wide eyed 'missa priddis' or a confident brownlow winner in the side this year, i'll take the latter.
Despite hopefully being shown towards the door by seasons end, i'd be glad if he has a new found confidence in himself after his bradbury win. A confident player is the sort of player you want, and hopefully it improves his game, even slightly if he's taking up every minute in the midfield again.
If it comes to having either a wide eyed 'missa priddis' or a confident brownlow winner in the side this year, i'll take the latter.
Ive only watched till half time and there was some definite better ball use there - of course it was the carlton seconds but still if he can replicate that against good teams and naita flies .....
About 4:20 from the end of the first there is a classic slowpoke 4 on 3 with priddis left behind the play and bennell trying to man up on two guys - with nic nat back hopefully he can cover hat scenario whilst matt trudges alongside a ruckman
About 4:20 from the end of the first there is a classic slowpoke 4 on 3 with priddis left behind the play and bennell trying to man up on two guys - with nic nat back hopefully he can cover hat scenario whilst matt trudges alongside a ruckman
- Banned
- #766
Why should the other players have to cover Priddis's man.
Why should they have to work harder.
With Nic Nat back to hopefully fully fit, that should be the icing on the cake take us above the average midfield, not just break even with middle of the road teams.
Not aimed at you Kranky Al, but there's a chorus of opinion from the Pro Priddis supporters that everyone needs to lift to cover Priddis.
And not one of those supporters has come out and defended that he is a liability defensively, in the 1000's of posts.
My post was an acceptance of the reality at wc - hes not going anywhere so how do we cover for him
If it were up to me hed be at east perth and sheed and yeo et al would be learning the game as fast as they could.
Ie not with priddis playing 80% of their minutes
If it were up to me hed be at east perth and sheed and yeo et al would be learning the game as fast as they could.
Ie not with priddis playing 80% of their minutes
- Banned
- #768
What a shamble of a club we are when we 'accept' major shortcomings that our club makes.
We are the Freo Dockers of old.
Surely that's the very nature of the world.
you can never rely on "if"
You can only ever bank on what actually happens.
Bradbury won the gold medal because he was the best on the day.
He trained hard, he earned selection, he won the his way into the final and he put himself in a position to win gold.
As I said previously Ablett was good enough to win the last six Brownlows but he didn't.
Australia would have won the the World Cup match against NZ if the Aussie batsmen had made 180 runs which they would normally make with ease but the didn't.
It is what it is and the wins are on the board and no "if" will ever be recorded.
As I said before durability is an asset and very much part of being a winner.
Last edited:
- Banned
- #770
- Jan 13, 2013
- 24,036
- 48,502
- AFL Club
- West Coast
At the end of the day Priddis and the Brownlow are quite alike, they are both majorly flawed and both revered by the unthinking masses.
Well I believe that elite thinkers like yourself will continue to be disappointed as neither is about to go away.
I still struggle to see you in this elite thinker category if you support the Smoties Brownlow views. If anything is flawed it is those views based on the great "IF" premise.
For the record I'm no great fan of Priddis but feel his inclusion in the team is justified, it is more criticism of the Brownlow that irks me. The Brownlow has and will always have it's place. It is what it is , a best and Fairest award with massive prestige in the football world. I mentioned before that I was privileged
to have attended a Brownlow Dinner and saw first hand the high regard the award holds, I saw all the emotion and heartache the players feel at this great event.
Flawed in your view but not in others and it is not about to go away.
- Jan 13, 2013
- 24,036
- 48,502
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Really, because all you see on TV is the players using it as an excuse to get smashed, looks to me like most of them treat it like a bit of a lark.
And not sure I've ever said anything about "if", but I do believe that the Brownlow is majorly flawed for reasons I've previously stated.
The same as the fans using the ALF Grand Final as an excuse to get smashed.
That makes sense. If I was an elite thinker I would have realised this.
Thanks for the insight.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
