-
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Too late for Goodes??
- Thread starter TheWhiteRhino
- Start date
- Tagged users None
still a massive chance
at about a a third of the way through the season..... he was BOG 4-5 weeks straight
went a little quiet when O'Keefe went into the midfield
last few weeks he has dominated at CHF
however two things will go against him........ a) we're not winning many matches...... b) the umpires will be extra conservative regarding goodes given the criticism last year
at about a a third of the way through the season..... he was BOG 4-5 weeks straight
went a little quiet when O'Keefe went into the midfield
last few weeks he has dominated at CHF
however two things will go against him........ a) we're not winning many matches...... b) the umpires will be extra conservative regarding goodes given the criticism last year
SM
Bigfooty Legend
And North Melbourne.
Still, that's 18 games where I suspect he's more than likely to get a vote.
And Swan, consistent? He had a quietish start to the year, only really came to the fore of everyone's attentions around Round 5 I believe? I've got a hazy memory and wasn't too focussed on him at the time, but I do remember there was a point where he suddenly started getting a lot of the ball, maybe it was his 48 possession week followed by another 40+ week? In that case that wassss Round 4, because I recall Ablett also got good possessions that week, against Adelaide. Of course, I stand to be corrected by Pies fans, I'm going off my recollection. He then also had a quiet game yesterday where I doubt he'd poll (Possibly 3. Anthony, 2. Goodes, 1. Maxwell). Thats 4 games where he's been quiet, a similar number to Goodes. It then comes down to which of the two is seen as the stand out in their side, and with Swan competing with the likes of Pendlebury, Davis, Didak etc. for votes, and Goodes' main competition O'Keefe... Swan won't poll as strongly as some people suggest.
ykickamoocow1
Rookie
- Aug 19, 2009
- 34
- 0
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Here is Goodes season
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pg-sydney-swans--adam-goodes
Other than a few quiet games he has done very well.
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pg-sydney-swans--adam-goodes
Other than a few quiet games he has done very well.
- Banned
- #31
nah its about right. he will be starting off with his customary 15 'reputation' votes remember.
I'm sorry to burst this bubble but Goodes was a liability to your team yesterday. I watched him live and he was the clanger king and had only 50% disposal efficiency. 50%, that is half the time he disposed of the footy it didn't go direct to a Swans player, which means one of the opposition had a crack at it. He has had some very good games, but given that Collingwood scored 10 of their goals from turnovers at the MCG yeseterday afternoon I would have thought that in this particular game he actually contributed to the Swans loss as much as any player. Wouldn't you say?
BTW only one other Swans player slaughtered the footy more than Goodes (Crouch at 42%). So if the player who gets the most footy for your team uses it the just about the worst how is that a WOW factor? I would not be happy to take that home as a WOW. As far as all us Collingwood fans murmuring admiringly about Goodes, GET YOUR HEARING CHECKED!! I think you mistook our s******s of derission as praise for the clanger king. Many of the times he got the ball yesterday I didn't say "get him" I said "I wonder what we can do after he turns it over". I particularly liked his chip pass in the Swans fwd line that Didak and Pendlebury punished by running it to the Pies goal square in about 15 seconds.
I'm sorry, but if A. Goodes was the Swans best player yesterday it is indicative of why they suffered a heavy defaet.
I wanna see someone else win the brownlow before Goodes end up with 5 just because he is goodes.
Goodes with 2 votes for 5 clangers and 50% effeciency in disposal? I would doubt it. BTW he was absolutely useless when it came to his defensive awareness as a forward/attacking player. Very unaccountable at times yesterday, so would be suprised if he polled at all.
You don't have to look at many stats, just the fact that you think he was BOG in a team that played mediocre footy, lost by 7 goals and he slaughtered the footy half the times he kicked it? No stats there, just cold hard facts. Dane Beams was BOG by a mile in a team that won at a canter. This was partly because Sydney coughed the footy up with some very poor skills of which the Goodes, as your BOG, contributed more than his fair share of. He is not a bad player but had a bad game yesterday, no biggy.
Goodes will be a chance. He will be around the 20 vote mark. I think Judd will get it this year.
Sydney have lost too many games IMHO.
I can't see any votes for him in rounds 10 to 13, 15 and 16 where I suspect the winning side will receive all. Add to that and he was hardly a star in the wins against Carlton (4), Richmond (6) and the Dees I don't think he is a serious contender.
I can't see any votes for him in rounds 10 to 13, 15 and 16 where I suspect the winning side will receive all. Add to that and he was hardly a star in the wins against Carlton (4), Richmond (6) and the Dees I don't think he is a serious contender.
Look I'm not particularly worried about the Brownlow votes or what the umpires thought as it has absolutely no bearing on the outcome of games. I mean Adam Goodes wouldn't wear his Brownlow medals on game day in the hope of playing better would he? No, so what the umpires think as reflected in Brownlow votes means nothing towards the result. The result of the game is a constant that indicates how well the teams and players performed, in fact to claim that you ignore stats is silly because the score of the game is a stat, quite simple really, you actually can't ignore stats when it is all said and done, but I digress.
No, I was more discussing the claims that Goodes was BOG from the point of view of people who can tell the difference between someone who has played well, and someone who gets the ball a lot but doesn't do anything with it (this isn't always the case with Goodes). I mean he may well get three votes for getting the ball the most in a team that lost heavily, thats the umpires call. But the facts of the game from an observers point of view are that Goodes had no bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the match, nothing, I mean it wasn't like it was close. Even if we ignore the stats that show he basically was inefficient, it wasn't as if Goodes played well enough to almost drag his team over the line (ala Buckley 2002 GF).
So I'm not sure how a mediocre performance (both Goodes and the team) deserves some of the rave reviews it has recieved on here. As a Collingwood supporter I would not be happy with hanging my hat on a medicocre performance on the back of a 7 goal defeat, even us eternal optimists that follow the Pies are not that delusional! I guess you try and take small mercies from a defeat, but not at the cost of ignoring the blatantly obvious fact that Goodes was nowhere near the BOG.
It wasn't as if he ever looked like influencing the game when it really mattered after half time, that was partly because he used the ball poorly and also because his team mates often didn't provide any viable options for him. Rather sadly his performances for the last 8 times the Swans and Collingwood have met have all been futile to varying degrees. Maybe for the Swans he was their BOG, if they are happy with his lack of defensive pressure and poor skills on the day, but not for me thanks.
Sorry if its been mentioned, but he only won his other two Brownlow's because Sydney were quite good at the time. I think he'll find it much harder to poll when Sydney have lost more than they have won.
- Banned
- #43
Here's some news.......
1. The Brownlow does not reward consistency. There are only 6 votes awarded each game to only 3 players.
2. You don't get bonus points for having an extra extra good game. 50 possessions still only gets at best 3 votes.
3. It is in the eye of the beholder. This is the umpires' award, no-one else's. They didn't ask for it to become the high profile award that it is, the media and the supporters made it so. There are things that the umpires see and things that they don't. Moreover, it apparently doesn't help one's chances if one spends time throughout the game yapping at them. It cost Diesel his third and has probably cost Ablett a couple too.
4. For various reasons, certain players stand out. With Goodes, the reason is obvious, he never gets a possession that isn't noticed by all there. Kirk, and many others like him, get stacks of possessions that go unseen. Deal with it. It's probably why Swan can't win.
I think probably Chris Judd will win this year. Other players that would be deserving include Ablett, Selwood, Swan, Montagna, Dal Santo, and yes, Adam Goodes. They would all be worthy winners this year.
One other thing about Goodes.......the majority of teams in the comp would pick him first for any position on the park if they had the chance. In other words, take any position on the ground, and the number of clubs that would choose Goodes to play that position rather than the bloke they have will always outnumber the clubs that wouldn't.
1. The Brownlow does not reward consistency. There are only 6 votes awarded each game to only 3 players.
2. You don't get bonus points for having an extra extra good game. 50 possessions still only gets at best 3 votes.
3. It is in the eye of the beholder. This is the umpires' award, no-one else's. They didn't ask for it to become the high profile award that it is, the media and the supporters made it so. There are things that the umpires see and things that they don't. Moreover, it apparently doesn't help one's chances if one spends time throughout the game yapping at them. It cost Diesel his third and has probably cost Ablett a couple too.
4. For various reasons, certain players stand out. With Goodes, the reason is obvious, he never gets a possession that isn't noticed by all there. Kirk, and many others like him, get stacks of possessions that go unseen. Deal with it. It's probably why Swan can't win.
I think probably Chris Judd will win this year. Other players that would be deserving include Ablett, Selwood, Swan, Montagna, Dal Santo, and yes, Adam Goodes. They would all be worthy winners this year.
One other thing about Goodes.......the majority of teams in the comp would pick him first for any position on the park if they had the chance. In other words, take any position on the ground, and the number of clubs that would choose Goodes to play that position rather than the bloke they have will always outnumber the clubs that wouldn't.
Ive very happy i put $5 on him couple of weeks ago at $18 for $85 return.
His price has dropped about half in that time
His price has dropped about half in that time
- Sep 10, 2006
- 20,980
- 23,012
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Liverpool FC
It's quite obvious that Frederlick either didn't watch the game or knows sweet fa about football. Yes Goodes had a low kicking efficiency but he hardly butchered the ball. It was more to do with how often he kicked long inside 50 only for the Collingwood defenders to repel it. The guy was on fire yesterday
Frederlick... please go back to looking at stats and DT scores because you really are starting to look like a fool. I think even most Collingwood supporters would acknowledge Goodes was brilliant yesterday.
Frederlick... please go back to looking at stats and DT scores because you really are starting to look like a fool. I think even most Collingwood supporters would acknowledge Goodes was brilliant yesterday.
Goodes luvs playing the pies...been our hoodoo club for too damn long but can never fault his efforts.
There was a game a cpl of yrs ago against them when we were never in the hunt yet he had 20 contested possessions in a losing team...it was Pies V Adam Goodes and its still the same. We're just bloody terrible against them apart from Goodes.
He has had a damn good season and the few extra votes coming home strong might put him in with a chance...would be thoroughly deserved again.
There was a game a cpl of yrs ago against them when we were never in the hunt yet he had 20 contested possessions in a losing team...it was Pies V Adam Goodes and its still the same. We're just bloody terrible against them apart from Goodes.
He has had a damn good season and the few extra votes coming home strong might put him in with a chance...would be thoroughly deserved again.
Agree. After the first few games he has been consistently a standout player. He's had a great year and should be at least top 3 in the Brownlow.
This years Brownlow count will be very interesting...
Similar threads
