6. Sylvia

5. Jurrah

4. Molony

3. Frawley

2. Jamar

1. Dunn

And the winner is ...

154.055 Aaron Davey

91.935 Brent Moloney

76.305 Cale Morton

71.561 Brock McLean

66.242 Colin Sylvia

63.967 Nathan Jones

60.559 Cameron Bruce

53.732 Jack Grimes

46.415 Ricky Petterd

45.940 Mark Jamar

39.609 James Frawley

37.985 Brad Green

36.653 Jared Rivers

36.144 Matthew Bate

34.406 James McDonald

33.646 Matthew Warnock

24.055 Liam Jurrah

21.535 Neville Jetta

19.408 Brad Miller

17.363 Shane Valenti

14.404 Paul Johnson

13.126 Russell Robertson

11.207 Stefan Martin

10.053 Kyle Cheney

9.952 Addam Maric

8.827 Jamie Bennell

8.603 Clint Bartram

8.031 Lynden Dunn

1.488 Tom McNamara

0.613 John Meesen

Sylvia, wow. Very excited for his 2010.

I really hope we dump the weighted system.

I still can't believe that McLean finished so high.

I agree Clint. Besides McLean I think it's a pretty fair indication of how players' years were. I'd expect the likes of Warnock to finish higher in the club's B&F though.

These players played during the season but did not poll any votes:

1. Simon Buckley (1 game)

4. Jack Watts (3 games)

20. Colin Garland (1 game)

21. Daniel Bell (3 games)

29. Michael Newton (5 games)

31. Paul Wheatley (3 games)

41. Rohan Bail (1 game spent injured)

42. Jake Spencer (6 games)

45. Matthew Whelan (10 games)

49. Jordie McKenzie (3 games)

21.535 Neville Jetta

8.827 Jamie Bennell

Interesting.

Considering the general consensus around here is that everyone is convinced Bennell is the next McLeod, while there has been no love for Nifty Nev.

Interesting.

Considering the general consensus around here is that everyone is convinced Bennell is the next McLeod, while there has been no love for Nifty Nev.

It's their first year BBP. They'll get recognised with more consistency & improvement. I think they played 14 / 15 games respectively too.

Other players form and their own game time are factors too.

i wonder how different the results would have been without the ranking system?

its an interesting system; does it reward players that contribute well when the team is winning or reward the players that win the matches?

I'd say its the former, you are more likely to get lots of points for staring in a win, than for being consistent and doing your job all year around...

deanox i think you are right in it being the 'former' when there is a win. It may have well been while you were away, but when we thumped Fremantle and Davey shined his lead blew right out. Of course he polled 6 from just about everyone, but there was a significant increase and with 4 wins for the season if a player plays particularly well in say 2 of those - they're bound to have some advantage. Or to be fair , "be rewarded"

Edited September 3, 200915 yr by High Tower

I still can't believe that McLean finished so high.

For some sad reason I still work out my own Melbourne B & F each season. Brock finished 6th in mine. The weighted system, which in some ways is similar to what I use, obviously helps those who play well in wins. Brock was in our best in three of our four wins by my calculations, which goes a long way to helping his score along. He didn't poll in too many games though. I guess the moral of the story is that if Brock McLean can have 25 blinders next season we can go 25-0!

deanox i think you are right in it being the 'former' when there is a win. It may have well been while you were away, but when we thumped Fremantle and Davey shined his lead blew right out. Of course he polled 6 from just about everyone, but there was a significant increase and with 4 wins for the season if a player plays particularly well in say 2 of those - they're bound to have some advantage. Or to be fair , "be rewarded"

yeah i was away for that, but caught half of it in paris (not sure if i should be ashamed of that haha).

at least davey has had a good year, but my biggest concern is that the award may reward the front runners who star in the big win, but go quiet in the loss. if a player average 25 touches every week, and another player averages 15 but gets 30 and 3 goals in each of 5 wins to make him in the top 2-3 on the ground who deserves the award? a big win can be worth 4 times more than an average loss...i suppose it could be argued that the player who performed well all year didnt have enough impact on the game, so i suppose at the end of the day each award is different and is deserved in its own way. and equally it could be argued either way depending on whether you see a player as an important cog who performed all year, a player with no impact, or a player who lifts when the game is there to be won...

Interesting.

Considering the general consensus around here is that everyone is convinced Bennell is the next McLeod, while there has been no love for Nifty Nev.

Think you'll find a couple of us who post more on 'ology are huge wraps for this kid, with the cheer squad being led by Deestroy All.

McLean is not right. Too high.

And Bate is way too low. My tip is for him to finish 3rd in the Bluey. He was one of our better players in the first half of the season.