Just lazy, lazy voting by the umpires. Wont be watching the count in the future.

1 hour ago, No. 31 said:

I think Bont was hard done by not to garner more votes but also Treloar had a great season and would have taken votes off him. IIRC Bont had a quiet start to the season but was huge in the middle/later part of the season.

As for the Bont v Cripps question raised by some, I would always take Cripps. He carried Carlton on his lonesome in the disastrous years, Bont was playing in a Premiership winning team as a 3rd year footballer. Cripps has definitely faced more adversity in football. This isn't a sleight on Bont either, just recognition that Cripps has travelled a very bumpy footballing road in the early years.

Bont is the best I’ve seen since Ablett jr. I wouldn’t have Cripps anywhere near that discussion. 

5 hours ago, Biffen said:

They should scrap the Downlow. Or at least remove the umpires from the process.

The umpires are too busy awarding frees for angry looks and expressions to make a clear judgement on the best player.

An idependent panel  and /or coaches would be better judges.

The umps are too busy keeping the scores close on games and reacting to the crowd ,swaying results to fit narratives etc.

Could not disagree with any of this. and add that the odds vastly changed the last 48 hours with some big money.

And it became the Cripps night before the Cripps night.

Obviously the umpires voting on Blues games are crippscentric and the umps voting the Pies Games are Nickcentric even when Josh is the best of the two. Those final count numbers are way off line for where both clubs finished and the closeness of some games!!!!

Just now, DeeZone said:

Obviously the umpires voting on Blues games are crippscentric and the umps voting the Pies Games are Nickcentric even when Josh is the best of the two. Those final count numbers are way off line for where both clubs finished and the closeness of some games!!!!

The media & coaches voted the same way

The Brownlow voting system is not an umpire issue, it's a system issue

Same as the game itself

what is strange is the number of best on grounds that the winners get. You would expect far more one and two votes in a proper statistical spread. Being the top player out of a possible 46 on 12 occasions is hard to believe. Cripps is good but he's no phenomenal superstar

45 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Just lazy, lazy voting by the umpires. Wont be watching the count in the future.

Not sure what's worse. The lazy voting or the questions dished out on the poor players by the hosts. It was horrifically cringeworthy 

The AFL determine that the umpires award the Brownlow votes.  It's not the umpires taking it upon themselves.  Never has been and never will be

Cause & effect in a system that can easily be rectified.  Not to perfect levels, that's impossible, but if we want a better system with regards to the Brownlow voting, the league needs to embrace a better, workable system

To me, a player receiving 45 votes in the Brownlow is a red flag moment.  It's just way too many votes regardless of how good a year Cripps had.  Same deal for Nick Daicos

We need a better system of awarding the votes (in previous posts I've outlined a different system using ex players as those who could award the votes)

Blaming the A-end of a problem is pointless and not a realistic solution

So without change, expect more of the same

A panel of qualufied judges (ex players, not media people) at each match awarding votes which takes into account the various positions on the ground and the degree of difficulty in excelling in the different positions

In theory, the panel of judges at each match would include ex backmen, ex forwards etc etc

Giiving votes out to forwards, backs, ruckmen, midfielders etc arriving at a consensus for the best 3 players

A very big ask but it is possible

Or, it stays as it is and we'll just continue to complain every year about the outcomes

Edited September 24, 20241 yr by Macca

17 hours ago, dees189227 said:

 Afl store know something?

 

Wonder how the sales of Nick Daicos's 2024 Brownlow medal guernsey are going? Could be an opportunity to collect a few at bargain basement prices and await the rebound.

Will Carlton and it's captain restore some prestige to the Brownlow by returning the 1922 centennial medal?

2 hours ago, Macca said:

The media & coaches voted the same way

Not sure about media, but Coaches’ votes were very different from those of the umpires. 

16 minutes ago, Fanatique Demon said:

Not sure about media, but Coaches’ votes were very different from those of the umpires. 

Didn't midfielders dominate the voting?

That was my point

In low scoring games where midfielders possessions are largely innefectual the backmen should get the bulk of the votes (in my view)

And we don't often get high scoring games so a forward who kicks 3+ is often highly effective.  Votes for forwards? 

But it seems that the midfielders are now getting far too many of the overall votes

1 hour ago, Macca said:

A panel of qualufied judges (ex players, not media people) at each match awarding votes which takes into account the various positions on the ground and the degree of difficulty in excelling in the different positions

In theory, the panel of judges at each match would include ex backmen, ex forwards etc etc

Giiving votes out to forwards, backs, ruckmen, midfielders etc arriving at a consensus for the best 3 players

A very big ask but it is possible

Or, it stays as it is and we'll just continue to complain every year about the outcomes

You can be the person that arranges the roster for these experts say 5 at each game 3 home 2 away over the 207 games each season. 

The logistics would require a full time AFL employee to be available 24/7 and on weekends also. 

No thanks. Let’s not get too bogged down the Coaches votes are the best really and plenty of diversity in their selections. Still have mids winning though. 

2 hours ago, 58er said:

You can be the person that arranges the roster for these experts say 5 at each game 3 home 2 away over the 207 games each season. 

The logistics would require a full time AFL employee to be available 24/7 and on weekends also. 

No thanks. Let’s not get too bogged down the Coaches votes are the best really and plenty of diversity in their selections. Still have mids winning though. 

Whar are you talking about?

The AFL are swimming in cash and my idea would not cost a lot anyway

The coaches votes are stacked with midfielders so what's your point?

Different mix but the media awards & Brownlow votes are also stacked with midfielders

 

Edited September 24, 20241 yr by Macca

2 hours ago, Hellaintabadplacetobe said:

Not sure what's worse. The lazy voting or the questions dished out on the poor players by the hosts. It was horrifically cringeworthy 

The “two” “two” “two” thing by Hamish to Cripps was one of the cringiest things I’ve seen. Hamish is too use to interviewing children. 

I wouldn't be putting the Brownlow votes in the hands of the  coaches either

How do they judge opposition players when they are concentrating on their own players so much?  They'd know the worth of their own players but the opposition?  

And what about bias?  That would raise it's ugly head year one.  No thanks

Charlie would be spinning in his grave. 

I wonder how many votes Cripps would have if he was correctly pinged for all the throws he does. I know others do it but he seems to be the master of throws.

3 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

what is strange is the number of best on grounds that the winners get. You would expect far more one and two votes in a proper statistical spread. Being the top player out of a possible 46 on 12 occasions is hard to believe. Cripps is good but he's no phenomenal superstar

It’s a great point, but the reality is that it’s the best player out of 6-7 other midfielders. The umps don’t look beyond the square.

I recall many years ago a journalist (too many years ago to remember who) telling the story of how after a game where Peter Hudson had kicked 16 the journo said to the umpire that he knew he couldn't tell him who he gave the Brownlow votes to, but that obviously Huddo would have got the three.  The ump replied that as didn't give any votes to Hudson he felt it was Ok to say so (questionable).  The journo asked gobsmacked how could he not give him a vote given he kicked 16.  The ump replied that he thought he'd only kicked about four. 🙄

12 minutes ago, Craig T said:

I recall many years ago a journalist (too many years ago to remember who) telling the story of how after a game where Peter Hudson had kicked 16 the journo said to the umpire that he knew he couldn't tell him who he gave the Brownlow votes to, but that obviously Huddo would have got the three.  The ump replied that as didn't give any votes to Hudson he felt it was Ok to say so (questionable).  The journo asked gobsmacked how could he not give him a vote given he kicked 16.  The ump replied that he thought he'd only kicked about four. 🙄

And back in those days the votes were read out differently... all the 1's then all the 2's finishing with the 3's

So there was no way of identifying which games certain players polled in.

I believe it wasn't until 1984 as to when the match votes in 1, 2, 3 order was adopted

In 1972 or maybe 1975, the last 20 × 3 votes read out were all from players in contention.  So the 'Knowledge' of who had won was in my opinion, known

So if people reckon it isn't hunky dory now, take a look back ... way back

*Former Demon Greg Wells was 2nd in 1972 pipped at the post after Len Thompson received the last 3 votes read out

Beaten by 3 votes but Wells was in front on the old countback system before that last 3 votes cruelled his chances

Rigged for dramatic effect?  You betcha

*Memory is a bit sketchy as it might have been Stan Alves pipped by Gary Dempsey in 1975 

 

8 hours ago, Macca said:

Forwards & Backs have been ignored for decades now

The term 'Midfielders medal' started at least 30 years ago but way back in the 70's many would complain that key forwards (especially) and Backs just didn't poll well enough

Star Key backs like Scarlett for instance, rarely pick up any votes at all

And it's not just the umpires either.  The media, coaches etc all award votes in the same way

Of course, in a general sense, midfielders stand out as they don't have direct opponents nor are they ever tagged

Meanwhile, a player like Hogan is often double or triple teamed whenever he goes near the ball

Excluding finals, Bob Pratt in 1934 kicked 138 goals in an 18 round season and received the paltry amount of 13 Brownlow votes

So not much has changed

Yes, good points.

Huh! Imagine kicking basically 7 goals a game for a whole season and losing by six votes in the Brownlow count.