Demonland Player of the Year

[Deevout 454]

6: Sylvia

5: Rivers

4: Frawley

3: Bruce

2: Bail

1: Jamar

[jnrmac 19,485]

6. Bruce

5 Frawley

4 Rivers

3 TMR

2 Bail

1 Junior

Sylvia got a fair amount of ball but his opponent for most of the day was arguably BOG.

Edited August 16, 2010 by jnrmac

[Melb16 458]

Soooo... still no actual discussion/explanation then? This is a DISCUSSION board after all, if you want to just reply to people with "You're wrong" etc you might as well go talk about the game in the playground... I'm sorry for not realising we were all meant to think exactly the same on this board of opinions...

But seeing you asked... (well you didn't but thought I'd elaborate for you), I think Bruce had an ok game, but in MY OPINION he shouldn't be in the votes DESPITE what the stats may say. I expected a lot more from him today in the type of game it was, but I THOUGHT he was one of a few that disappeared when he was needed but played well when brought into the game by others.

Now, please understand all you Adolf's on here, that this is not gospel, it's not definitive, but it is MY OPINION, which right or wrong in your minds, I am entitled to express seeing that is the spirit of an open discussion board such as this.

Will be intersting to see if he gets votes from the coaches. Seeing as they will vote Sewell, Burgoyne and probably Franklin, if Bruce does get votes it means the coaches thought he was in our 2-3 best players. He was clearly in our best 6 yesterday, I think you have a bias against him.

If he does vote does that mean the coaches don't have a clue and dont watch the game?

Edited August 16, 2010 by Melb16

[Choko 493]

Will be intersting to see if he gets votes from the coaches. Seeing as they will vote Sewell, Burgoyne and probably Franklin, if Bruce does get votes it means the coaches thought he was in our 2-3 best players. He was clearly in our best 6 yesterday, I think you have a bias against him.

If he does vote does that mean the coaches don't have a clue and dont watch the game?

If Bruce gets one vote from one poster here, I would hazard a guess that means he was probably Melbourne's best. The anti-Bruce sentiment here is astonishing. 9 tackles and a negating game on Hodge. Wake up.

[Demon Tragic 0]

6. Sylvia

5. Frawley

4. Bruce

3. McKenzie

2. Bail

1. Wonaemirri

If you don't like my votes, bad luck, thier my votes not yours.

I wonder why so many people feel the need to ask people to justify thier opinion or call them stupid coz theirs varies.

If you want my justification, 'Just coz'.

[Chook 14,647]

If you don't like my votes, bad luck, thier my votes not yours.

I wonder why so many people feel the need to ask people to justify thier opinion or call them stupid coz theirs varies.

If you want my justification, 'Just coz'.

I'm the opposite. I'd just love for someone to comment on my votes. To talk about why I loved who I did is one of the reasons I log on to Demonland so often.

[Green Machine 63]

Bruce was OK on Hodge. His kicking wasn't the issue for me today, but rather his reluctance to put his body in at the contest. Too many times he tried to soccer the ball or stand a step away from a pack, instead of diving in. Pretty disappointing from a vice captain in a must-win game.

Sorry, but thats what you do when its wet wether footy, get it forward any way possible.

[P-man 13,309]

I can't understand some of the childish namecalling and bickering that goes on at this place. A guy expresses an opinion that he simply doesn't think a player was as good as the stats show and he gets flamed, labelled stupid etc. We all support the same bloody club but you'd think it was the BF Bay in here the way that some carry on. Ridiculous.

Anyhow, my votes.

6. Bail

5. Sylvia

4. Frawley

3. McKenzie

2. Bruce

1. Jamar

[Jaded No More 59,837]

Sorry, but thats what you do when its wet wether footy, get it forward any way possible.

Please, wet weather footy calls for hard head-over-the-ball style of play (and so does dry weather mind you). That's why when it poured, Hawthorn were able to dominate with their strong bodies in the middle.

With the exception of McKenzie, nobody else consistently put their head over the ball yesterday, and that is the number one reason we lost. We didn't have the cattle to compete with the hard bodies and physically of Hawthorn's midfield.... oh to be in 2012 already!

[stuie 7,374]

Will be intersting to see if he gets votes from the coaches. Seeing as they will vote Sewell, Burgoyne and probably Franklin, if Bruce does get votes it means the coaches thought he was in our 2-3 best players. He was clearly in our best 6 yesterday, I think you have a bias against him.

If he does vote does that mean the coaches don't have a clue and dont watch the game?

Yup, fair call, however I don't have a bias against him, it's probably more that maybe I have too high an expectation and get overly disappointed when those expectations aren't met.

Merely expressing an opinion that differs from the majority.

[H_T 2,941]

If you don't like my votes, bad luck, thier my votes not yours.

I wonder why so many people feel the need to ask people to justify thier opinion or call them stupid coz theirs varies.

If you want my justification, 'Just coz'.

I'm the opposite. I'd just love for someone to comment on my votes. To talk about why I loved who I did is one of the reasons I log on to Demonland so often.

You both make valid points. Same thing happens in Rising Star voting or voting in games by various journalists, all votes vary in some way shape or form, even coaches votes.

Sorry, but thats what you do when its wet wether footy, get it forward any way possible.

Not necessarily. You can identify sometimes which players make good decisions and others who don't necessarily make good decisions on occassions in the heat of battle.

[beelzebub 22,708]

6 - Colin Sylvia

5 - Mark Jamar

4 - James Frawley

3 - Rohan Bail

2 - Cameron Bruce

1 - Jordie McKenzie

[Demonland 66,860]

James Frawley is in the box seat with two rounds to go ...

154.549 James Frawley

117.698 Mark Jamar

116.060 Colin Sylvia

92.551 Brad Green

75.042 Brent Moloney

74.103 James McDonald

64.773 Jack Grimes

60.827 Tom Scully

59.078 Jack Trengove

58.713 Jordie McKenzie

53.393 Aaron Davey

50.076 Cameron Bruce

42.646 Lynden Dunn

33.878 Matthew Bate

27.093 Clint Bartram

25.084 Joel Macdonald

24.150 Nathan Jones

22.896 Jamie Bennell

20.656 Ricky Petterd

19.468 Rohan Bail

17.368 Cale Morton

17.257 Jordan Gysberts

17.065 Matthew Warnock

14.122 Colin Garland

10.638 Jared Rivers

8.073 Neville Jetta

7.064 Brad Miller

6.353 Jack Watts

6.174 Austin Wonaeamirri

5.450 Liam Jurrah

1.732 Paul Johnson

[Chook 14,647]

Pretty good work from Colin Sylvia, given that he's missed what, nine games.

[Green Machine 63]

Please, wet weather footy calls for hard head-over-the-ball style of play (and so does dry weather mind you). That's why when it poured, Hawthorn were able to dominate with their strong bodies in the middle.

With the exception of McKenzie, nobody else consistently put their head over the ball yesterday, and that is the number one reason we lost. We didn't have the cattle to compete with the hard bodies and physically of Hawthorn's midfield.... oh to be in 2012 already!

Thats true, it also calls for getting the footy forward, any way possible.

[daisycutter 28,723]

Thrilling post... care to elaborate or is that the extent of your retort

As you are in a very small minority I think it is up to you to prove your point

Just saying that stats aren't worth anything is not a logical argument in itself

Considering the appalling conditions Bruce's disposal was quite good (in fact better than most)

[Mono 454]

Soooo... still no actual discussion/explanation then? This is a DISCUSSION board after all, if you want to just reply to people with "You're wrong" etc you might as well go talk about the game in the playground... I'm sorry for not realising we were all meant to think exactly the same on this board of opinions...

But seeing you asked... (well you didn't but thought I'd elaborate for you), I think Bruce had an ok game, but in MY OPINION he shouldn't be in the votes DESPITE what the stats may say. I expected a lot more from him today in the type of game it was, but I THOUGHT he was one of a few that disappeared when he was needed but played well when brought into the game by others.

Now, please understand all you Adolf's on here, that this is not gospel, it's not definitive, but it is MY OPINION, which right or wrong in your minds, I am entitled to express seeing that is the spirit of an open discussion board such as this.

Y_M?

[Chook 14,647]

As you are in a very small minority I think it is up to you to prove your point

Don't you think it is up to everyone to prove their point, regardless of how popular their opinion is?

[Jaded No More 59,837]

James Frawley is in the box seat with two rounds to go ...

An absolute certainty to win our B&F IMO.

Bailey was gushing about him after the Hawthorn game, which is rare from Bailey, who generally gives nothing away.

[daisycutter 28,723]

Don't you think it is up to everyone to prove their point, regardless of how popular their opinion is?

Of course, but only upto a point

He is perfectly free to not give Bruce any votes, but he went beyond this and bagged Bruce severely

This despite virtual unanimous praise for Bruce from voters here, the press etc

Given that someone takes such an extreme position the onus is generally on them to prove their point

Anyway, many posters did give reasoned argument in favour of Bruce which he just ignored or brushed aside and, then, had the temerity to accuse others of not trying to prove their point. A bit rich methinks, hence my reply