ok before you all jump down my throat a good backman and a tight tagger are essential players to have in modern footy. backmen, perhaps the most important on the ground. why then do these players miss out when it comes to accolades and votes etc? the credit normally goes to the high possession midfielder or the goal kicking forward. they are the two glamorous positions on the ground, the most eye catching and memorable. by this logic the tagger who stops the oppositions star from getting his usual 30 touches and restricts him to less than 10 is equally valuable to his team as the teammate who had 30 touches. and the backman whose player took 3 marks and kicked no goals could have been as valuable as the forward who kicked 6. when a team gets beaten it is easy to attribute the lack of goals to other players, the midfield winning the ball, the 3rd defender dropping across. when a team wins all over the ground, the tagger is just another player having a good day. both these players are again over shadowed.

when casting votes or naming the best players, can these 'negative' roles be rated as being equally important for the win putting these players amongst the vote getters?

feel free to discuss this, the big drive for this question was where did godfrey and carrol fit into the votes last week?

a question that has frustrated me for a very long time, especially given my affinity for wheels. how can a man who has been so instrumental to our team, and many of our wins, have polled in one game? it honestly boggles the mind.

however in saying that, it is very difficult to be critical of upires for that. 44 players on the ground, itd have to be difficult to give one of the top three a vote for stopping an opposition player. perhaps the brownlow count, or any other count, should have a panel of backmen who vote on the effectiveness of backmen in each game, maybe giving votes for the two best stoppers in a game.

because a guy like glenn archer deserves more accolades, not that they would change anybodys perceptions of him

baker won the saints best and fairest

Leo barrys mark won them a grandfinal. Good defenders are worth their weight in gold.

Carroll. Rivers, Bell and Whelan are very valauble to the MFC. They may not poll many votes (rivers seems to go unnoticed) but they are the reasons why the demons win games.

Petterd, Frawley and Warnock could be gold also. Our assets look good.

Taggers are handy. Bartram and godders can run with and shut down the best.

They may not poll many votes (rivers seems to go unnoticed) but they are the reasons why the demons win games.

well thats sort of what im asking in this thread. everyone rates them but no one gives them votes or the due acknowledgement. why not?

Richmond's Nathan Brown was on MMM recently and said something along the lines of the following -

'If you have an even 1v1 you're going to back the forward to win the contest the majority of the time because they're generally the more creative and talented - that's why they're playing in the forward line.' I think the same could be said about taggers and midfielders.

I agree that most awares are too weighted towards the offensive players, but I wouldn't want to go too far in the other extreme.

ha. but it's nathan brown...a forward...a rather happy in himself forward too

are you saying that players like rivers arent as good as an equivalent forward, because he plays a negating role? he reads the play better than almost anyone...

what about players like scarlett? they get run and create play.

As anyone who watches Footy Classified will know they have a new award which is voted on by the coaches of the match, and Godders got votes last week.

I think coaches are able to see the definate worth of taggers, or else they simply wouldn't be getting a game.

As for brownlow voting, the umpires supposidly watch the ball, and the play makers, and therefore they are the ones that catch thier eye, so its not likely that a tagger will be winning the brownlow.

Richmond's Nathan Brown was on MMM recently and said something along the lines of the following -

'If you have an even 1v1 you're going to back the forward to win the contest the majority of the time because they're generally the more creative and talented - that's why they're playing in the forward line.' I think the same could be said about taggers and midfielders.

I agree that most awares are too weighted towards the offensive players, but I wouldn't want to go too far in the other extreme.

Nathan Brown is correct in what he says and that impacts on how umpires vote.

BTW, Brown's comments only undermine those that say Miller has no defensive skills but should play CHF.

FWIW, I think the voting in the B'low should be taken with a grain of salt as to accolades.

A good side knows it needs good defenders especially if and when its wins ths biggest accolade of all.

Nathan Brown is correct in what he says and that impacts on how umpires vote.

I think the problem with Brown's statement is that the majority of the time the contest is not an "even 1v1". The odds are naturally weighted towards the forward because the ball is usually coming down the field through a member of his own side, who can put it where the forward wants it. That tips the votes immeasurably.

Nathan Brown is correct in what he says and that impacts on how umpires vote.

BTW, Brown's comments only undermine those that say Miller has no defensive skills but should play CHF.

FWIW, I think the voting in the B'low should be taken with a grain of salt as to accolades.

A good side knows it needs good defenders especially if and when its wins ths biggest accolade of all.

I'm with you on this one Rhino.....

It would seem that the creativity side of the sport definitely lies with the forwards because it is their job to get the ball through the big sticks no matter what.

The defensive side of the game is to stop this and that doesn't take as much creativity, and can therefore probably be learned.

And that is why the positions are valued differently to those in the know.

It doesn't necessarily mean one is staggeringly more important than the other, the reality is probably quite the opposite in truth !!!

I think the problem with Brown's statement is that the majority of the time the contest is not an "even 1v1". The odds are naturally weighted towards the forward because the ball is usually coming down the field through a member of his own side, who can put it where the forward wants it. That tips the votes immeasurably.

His comment specifically stated that 'when it's an even 1v1...'

Obviously forwards have an advantage much of the time because their team is attempting to kick to their advantage - this is neither here nor there.

are you saying that players like rivers arent as good as an equivalent forward, because he plays a negating role? he reads the play better than almost anyone...

what about players like scarlett? they get run and create play.

Are you saying that Godfrey is as good as Goodes?