Too late to get on Goodes for his third Brownlow?

[potatomasher]

That doesn't explain why he wasn't deserving in 2003.

He won with 22 votes. The most recent time outside of that year that he could have won with 22 votes is 1996. I'm not saying he wasn't the equal best player in the competition that year, but he was definitely lucky that he had a good year when nobody else really did.

 

[Blotter]

Three votes for that effort? Seriously? He was absolutely dreadful in the first half.

As for 2003, James Hird was the best player that season. Goodes, Buckley and Ricciuto were very lucky he played four less games than all of them.

 

[RizzoTheRat]

Gee this guy is a gamebreaker. Was a tug of war for most of the match just crying out for someone to stand up then Goodes just went into the middle and ripped the game in two.

Yep. The other thing about the move was it brought Jessie White into the game. I don't think our forward line has room for three talls. The Goodes & White combo was good, but with Bradshaw now patrolling the goal square I wouldn't be surprised if Goodes moves on ball more often this year and White plays CHF.

If so, another Brownlow may not be out of the question.

 

[Dangas]

maybe, maybe not

 

[Athomas]

He'd struggle to get a vote today.

Hanneberry - 3
Bradshaw - 2
Kennely/Harvey/Kirk/Goodes - 1

Too funny.

Goodes for the 3 votes. Boooookmark it. If you know anything about the Brownlow you will know he will get 2-3.

 

[rose jam]

Three votes for that effort? Seriously? He was absolutely dreadful in the first half.

As for 2003, James Hird was the best player that season. Goodes, Buckley and Ricciuto were very lucky he played four less games than all of them.

Not right, Buckley was clearly the best player in 2003 (as he as in 1999) but MM rested him in a lot of last quarters in matches he blitzed when we had control of games which reflected in the brownlow voting.

 

[Blotter]

Not right, Buckley was clearly the best player in 2003 (as he as in 1999) but MM rested him in a lot of last quarters in matches he blitzed when we had control of games which reflected in the brownlow voting.

Actually, yeah, that's a fair point.

I guess what I was (clumsily) trying to say was that Hird was a better player than Goodes that season. Easily.

As you have reminded me, Buckley was too.

 

[AG]

Not sure anyone was a clear best in 03. It was a very even year for the star players but Buckley probably was the best.. Goodes was lucky that year but there was no doubt he deserved 06. It was only between him, Judd and West in 06. It was between about 10 players in 03, so Goodes had a lot of luck that year.

 

[SydneyGoose]

Three votes for that effort? Seriously? He was absolutely dreadful in the first half.

As for 2003, James Hird was the best player that season. Goodes, Buckley and Ricciuto were very lucky he played four less games than all of them.

Okay, I don't want to stir this pot, but How can you say that Hird would have been as good if he had played in those other four matches. Maybe Hird would have thrown his knee or blown a hammie or just out right sucked! I think Hird's one of the greats of the game and love hearing his opinions on everything and anything he cares to share with the world, but he didn't play the matches so he gets 0 for them.

 

[Perce]

I don't think I've ever seen any player - no, dammit, any person - who looks quite as good in red and white hooped socks.

 

[Perce]

Maybe Hird would have thrown his knee or blown a hammie or just out right sucked!

Hmm, they are either nasty-sounding injuries or intriguing-sounding sexual practices. Not sure which.

 

[ITS ME]

Originally Posted by Wheres Wally
Umpires pet so why couldnt he win it. Do champions win brownlows, i mean ask CAREY Jezza , ABLETT etc what they think. I would of picked any of these three before goodes and none won blownlows.

**** me, didn't Jezza and Goodesy have some epic battles?

Pretty sure poster meant he would of taken the three guys in his side before adam goodes if he had a choice. If those three couldnt win a brownlow what credibility does the award really have

 

[Jeebus]

Originally Posted by Wheres Wally
Umpires pet so why couldnt he win it. Do champions win brownlows, i mean ask CAREY Jezza , ABLETT etc what they think. I would of picked any of these three before goodes and none won blownlows.

**** me, didn't Jezza and Goodesy have some epic battles?

Pretty sure poster meant he would of taken the three guys in his side before adam goodes if he had a choice. If those three couldnt win a brownlow what credibility does the award really have

Considering the last Brownlow winners have been Akermanis, Black, Buckley, Riccuito, Goodes, Cousins, Judd, Bartel, Cooney and Ablett and it is very much agreed these are the best players in the competition it has some credibility.

Brownlow has been a midfielders award for years, i noticed the examples you used were forwards. You will also notice most clubs b&F are won by midfielders as are the MVP awards.

You will struggle to name any other midfielders who are more deserving than the ones already mentioned to win in the last 7 years.

You can make a case for woewoedin in 2000 not being a great player but he was a very very good player that year and a large reason Melbourne made the grand final

 

[ITS ME]

Considering the last Brownlow winners have been Akermanis, Black, Buckley, Riccuito, Goodes, Cousins, Judd, Bartel, Cooney and Ablett and it is very much agreed these are the best players in the competition it has some credibility.

Brownlow has been a midfielders award for years, i noticed the examples you used were forwards. You will also notice most clubs b&F are won by midfielders as are the MVP awards.

You will struggle to name any other midfielders who are more deserving than the ones already mentioned to win in the last 7 years.

You can make a case for woewoedin in 2000 not being a great player but he was a very very good player that year and a large reason Melbourne made the grand final

Dont disagree that the brownlow is won by midfielders but this doesnt mean it has credabilty . It only means that umpires see these players more. The three i mentioned are easily some of the best would see and never won a brownlow. Perhaps letting the 4th umpire vote instead may be a improvement. Reiwolt Frankin Brown Scarlett etc are as valuable or as good as any that you have mentioned. Definate flaws in the voting system.

 

[skzm]

He won with 22 votes. The most recent time outside of that year that he could have won with 22 votes is 1996. I'm not saying he wasn't the equal best player in the competition that year, but he was definitely lucky that he had a good year when nobody else really did.

That and Hird missed 6 matches....

 

[giantsully]

I would personally lean to Kirk for his 15 tackles. He and Swallow (13 tackles) put on a 2 man war today.

I just read this stat - hysterical! 28 tackles and most of those would have been on each other! Kirk had 16 touches to go with his 15 tackles and Swallow 13 disposals.

I'm guessing both boys slept well Saturday night!!

 

[Bloods Rule!]

I just read this stat - hysterical! 28 tackles and most of those would have been on each other! Kirk had 16 touches to go with his 15 tackles and Swallow 13 disposals.

I'm guessing both boys slept well Saturday night!!

Now learn from the master, Grasshopper.