The never ending Priddis debate - part II

[Kernel Sanders]

You're right, it does shore up their argument. You make that sound like a bad thing, that the Eagles coaching panel, the collective AFL coaches, the umpires, plus the overwhelming majority of the football industry rates him highly. That we haven't won a flag in Priddis' time is not solely his fault, he's been doing his job for the team better than just about anyone over that period. Are Adelaide supporters similarly feral about Patrick Dangerfield because he hasn't lead them to a flag? Maybe Bombers fans are screaming blue murder that Jobe Watson needs to be got rid of for lack of September success? Perhaps there's a cabal of Saints supporters who've been calling for the axing of Nick Reiwoldt for years now? I mean he let Collingwood's Shaw smother that certain goal on the line in one GF, that should have been the straw that broke the camel's back!

And of course we can't forget Chris Judd, lured from West Coast to specifically bring Carlton success. Clearly their lack of success can only be attributed to Judd?

Doing a great job of feeding his team-mates half volleyed handballs or shanked helicopter kicks, 30 times a game, game in game out.

Not sure what your definition of success here is Tracker.

 

[Pottering]

Doing a great job of feeding his team-mates half volleyed handballs or shanked helicopter kicks, 30 times a game, game in game out.

Not sure what your definition of success here is Tracker.

Beauty, or lack thereof, is in the eye of the beholder. At the risk of repetition clearly those who award him votes don't share your views, and neither do I. All those allegedly poorly served team-mates need to do is actually get their own ball to avoid the allegedly poor service. Now, there's an idea.

 

[Godfather32]

Beauty, or lack thereof, is in the eye of the beholder. At the risk of repetition clearly those who award him votes don't share your views, and neither do I. All those allegedly poorly served team-mates need to do is actually get their own ball to avoid the allegedly poor service. Now, there's an idea.

Yes...those who award him votes. I found the votes from the game that I previously posted about (first game against Collingwood last year), Priddis was indeed awarded 3 votes in that game despite Pendlebury dominating and almost singlehandedly carrying them over the line. I don't put much stock in Brownlow votes because of games like this.
It's a bit hard to win their own ball when Priddis is always there at the ball drop clogging everything up.

 

[Pottering]

Yes...those who award him votes. I found the votes from the game that I previously posted about (first game against Collingwood last year), Priddis was indeed awarded 3 votes in that game despite Pendlebury dominating and almost singlehandedly carrying them over the line. I don't put much stock in Brownlow votes because of games like this.
It's a bit hard to win their own ball when Priddis is always there at the ball drop clogging everything up.

These things are subjective calls, it is rare for a player on a losing team to get top votes so the umps would have thought long and hard before giving Priddis 3 votes. That you personally don't agree hardly damns the Brownlow as a concept.

As for winning the ball a number of players have been tried and continue to get tried, but they've proven far less effective. Seems you'd rather a player who can't get his hands on it in there instead, at least that would remove "clogging everything up" as the opposition sweep it away.

 

[kranky al]

Yes...those who award him votes. I found the votes from the game that I previously posted about (first game against Collingwood last year), Priddis was indeed awarded 3 votes in that game despite Pendlebury dominating and almost singlehandedly carrying them over the line. I don't put much stock in Brownlow votes because of games like this.
It's a bit hard to win their own ball when Priddis is always there at the ball drop clogging everything up.

But he got the coaches votes and the Brownlow votes - he was the best player on the ground

I vote for a recount on the score

 

[Kernel Sanders]

These things are subjective calls, it is rare for a player on a losing team to get top votes so the umps would have thought long and hard before giving Priddis 3 votes. That you personally don't agree hardly damns the Brownlow as a concept.

As for winning the ball a number of players have been tried and continue to get tried, but they've proven far less effective. Seems you'd rather a player who can't get his hands on it in there instead, at least that would remove "clogging everything up" as the opposition sweep it away.

Has your Poster Love Child been tried anywhere else?

Nope, can't hack it. Can't hack keeping up defensively either.

The experts have spoken, the coaches don't bother tagging him. No point to it. Tag / Untag, he has no impact on a game.

 

[Pottering]

Has your Poster Love Child been tried anywhere else?

Nope, can't hack it. Can't hack keeping up defensively either.

The experts have spoken, the coaches don't bother tagging him. No point to it. Tag / Untag, he has no impact on a game.

You're struggling now. Just rambling ("Tag / Untag, he has no impact on a game") with no semblance of reality. WHY would you want to play your best inside ball winner in any position other than where he's clearly the team's best? Maybe Josh Kennedy could play full back now that McKenzie's out, I mean you obviously think players should be versatile?

 

[Pottering]

But he got the coaches votes and the Brownlow votes - he was the best player on the ground

I vote for a recount on the score

Too late; if we hadn't kicked 15.11 to their 17.7 and if Yeo hadn't dropped that sitter then got his teeth knocked out, but none of that changes the result of the game or the Brownlow votes.

 

[Johnno22]

But he got the coaches votes and the Brownlow votes - he was the best player on the ground

I vote for a recount on the score

There really is no correlation between Brownlow votes and winning games or Ablett would not have won his Brownlow at Gold Coast.
In saying that Pendlebury certainly turned that game against Collingwood after being down for the first three quarters, but nothing less than you would expect from a top 5 player in the comp.

 

[WCErevival]

Yes...those who award him votes. I found the votes from the game that I previously posted about (first game against Collingwood last year), Priddis was indeed awarded 3 votes in that game despite Pendlebury dominating and almost singlehandedly carrying them over the line. I don't put much stock in Brownlow votes because of games like this.
It's a bit hard to win their own ball when Priddis is always there at the ball drop clogging everything up.

You could look at it another way. Priddis dominated for the first 3 quarters. Thats 3 quarters to Pendleburys 1.

 

[Godfather32]

There really is no correlation between Brownlow votes and winning games or Ablett would not have won his Brownlow at Gold Coast.
In saying that Pendlebury certainly turned that game against Collingwood after being down for the first three quarters, but nothing less than you would expect from a top 5 player in the comp.

No there isn't, but when a player takes over the game and virtually win's it off his own boot you would expect him to get the most votes yes?

 

[Godfather32]

You could look at it another way. Priddis dominated for the first 3 quarters. Thats 3 quarters to Pendleburys 1.

Did he dominate or did he just get the ball a lot? There's a big difference.
I know which player I would rather have on my team, the one that steps up and wins us the game. You might prefer prolific losers though?

 

[Godfather32]

These things are subjective calls, it is rare for a player on a losing team to get top votes so the umps would have thought long and hard before giving Priddis 3 votes. That you personally don't agree hardly damns the Brownlow as a concept.

As for winning the ball a number of players have been tried and continue to get tried, but they've proven far less effective. Seems you'd rather a player who can't get his hands on it in there instead, at least that would remove "clogging everything up" as the opposition sweep it away.

You really think the umpires think long and hard about there votes? I think it's more along the lines of a cursory glance at the stats sheet and a quick poll between the 3 of them.

 

[Johnno22]

You really think the umpires think long and hard about there votes? I think it's more along the lines of a cursory glance at the stats sheet and a quick poll between the 3 of them.

i'm sure I read somewhere that they do a review at the end of each quarter.

 

[kranky al]

You could look at it another way. Priddis dominated for the first 3 quarters. Thats 3 quarters to Pendleburys 1.

Domination involves making the little men who press the buttons that make the big numbers on the screens change

Not racking up personal possessions that lead nowhere.

 

[Godfather32]

Interesting read from a player on the Brownlow - http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...inistering-rules/story-fnp04d70-1227074122108

 

[Godfather32]

Here's another, for those of you who like "Experts" this guy is one, it says so under his picture
http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/05/09/should-the-umpires-determine-the-brownlow-medal-winner/

 

[Godfather32]

Apparently they don't see the stats. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/brownl...snt-broken-so-why-fix-it-20140821-106mrs.html
But here's an interesting quote from an umpire on how he votes - "My view is influence: a player who might not have played four really strong quarters, but who swung the game and won it. If he kicked five in the third quarter in a close game, and it was the clear decider between the two teams, that's where I'd go." Guess he wasn't umpiring the game in question.

 

[WCErevival]

Domination involves making the little men who press the buttons that make the big numbers on the screens change

Not racking up personal possessions that lead nowhere.

We were leading at 3/4 time. Matts 8 tackles and kicking 2.1 himself would have helped I would say. But you're right he did absolutely nothing. May as well played 21 men.

 

[Godfather32]

We were leading at 3/4 time. Matts 8 tackles and kicking 2.1 himself would have helped I would say. But your right he did absolutely nothing. May as well played 21 men.

Only to have absolutely no influence on the game in the fourth quarter when it mattered most.

 

[kranky al]

Interesting read from a player on the Brownlow - http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...inistering-rules/story-fnp04d70-1227074122108

I agree wholeheartedly - not just because of matt but because it doesn't adequately represent the comp - it's purely a midfielders medal because that's what the umps see most of.

 

[Godfather32]

I agree wholeheartedly - not just because of matt but because it doesn't adequately represent the comp - it's purely a midfielders medal because that's what the umps see most of.

They even admit to it, Darren Goldspink - ""Everyone knows midfielders stick out because they are around the ball. As an umpire you are always most aware of players who go in and get the football," Goldspink said this week."

 

[WCErevival]

Only to have absolutely no influence on the game in the fourth quarter when it mattered most.

So by your logic Kennedy could kick 20 goals in the first 3 quarters and none in the last and he would have had a poor game because it didn't win us the game.

 

[kranky al]

We were leading at 3/4 time. Matts 8 tackles and kicking 2.1 himself would have helped I would say. But you're right he did absolutely nothing. May as well played 21 men.

I can't remember the game in question but if he kicked 2.1 then he did have an impact - I believe he kicked about 10-12 for the year so it must have been a big game for him. Generally speaking he doesn't bother the scorers much or get involved in scoring chains

 

[Godfather32]

So by your logic Kennedy could kick 20 goals in the first 3 quarters and none in the last and he would have had a poor game because it didn't win us the game.

Couldn't tell you, because in your ridiculous hypothetical situation I have no idea how everyone else played. I'd suggest that if Kennedy kicked 20 goals in 3 quarters and we still lost that there would be plenty of great individual performances from the other team as well.