Macca

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

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

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

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

Didn't midfielders dominate the voting? That was my point

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

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

The Brownlow voting system is not an umpire issue, it's a system issue Same as the game itself

The media & coaches voted the same way

Well I'm certainly not blaming the umpires and I never have and never will But there is a better way to judge the best players A panel of ex players who played in a variety of positions awarding votes to players in various positions But it will never happen as the AFL aren't a progressive organisation. It's all about the $$$$

The Brownlow needs a total revamp to be credible but I'd argue that overhaul should have happened close on a century ago (The Bob Pratt example being a standout misnomer) We have the AA team to recognise all the positions but the Brownlow can only be won by a midfielder (these days) How do you add an arbitrary degree of difficulty factor? Ditch the umpires and appoint a panel of judges (made up of ex players only) who all played in a variety of positions? Might work but I can't see the AFL changing anything anyway The coaches award was won by Nick Daicos who not only never has a direct opponent, but he doesn't even have an opposite number. He plays as a loose man wherever he chooses to wander And that's the coaches awarding the votes

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

Bills 3 possessions, 3 TD's Switching to the Bengals/Wash match

2 games tomorrow and they overlap for the most part. An hour & a half gap works better than 45 minutes NFL scheduling can be a bit questionable at times 9.30am Jags @ Bills 10.15am Commanders @ Bengals

Another week of upset wins with 8 road winners saluting! Probably the biggest upset was a banged up Rams winning But the Vikings, Broncos, Giants, Packers, Panthers all won starting as outsiders Probably the most impressive win was the Vikings. Sam Darnald with another standout performance. What a turnaround! Minnesota are at Lambeau next Sunday with Jordan Love expected to suit-up for the Packers. On paper at least, a big clash within the division

DemonDave is streaking ahead in the tipping comp after being the sole 3 point winner again, this week! But it's a long season and we play for double points in weeks 5, 9, 13, 17 & 18 So it's possible to pick up 8 points in any of those bonus weeks Leaderboard Tipping Comp (points awarded this week in brackets) 11 - DemonDave (3+1) 5 - Go the Biff (1), DeeSpencer (1), layzie (1), Macca (1) 3 - BDA (1), Dr. Gonzo (1), JV7 (1), titan_uranus (1) 2 - Gorgoroth (0), Clintosaurus (0), Dee Zephyr (0) 1 - ElDiablo14 (0)

Tips @DeeSpencer 7Mate Games tomorrow 3.00am Houston @ Minnesota 6.25am 49ers @ Rams Followed by the Armchair Experts (with Ben Graham)

Lions, 49ers, Chiefs

Do they still do the GF parade and if so, will any of the players partake? And there are any number of Fitzroy/Brisbane and South/ Sydney supporters based in Melbourne Doesn't necessarily show up in memberships as neither team plays a lot of games in Melbourne (consistently) By the way, they should do But the Swans & Lions supporters are often out in force when they play at the MCG. Especially against the Demons Holding on to a large element of supporters based in Melbourne seems a no-brainer. It's easy money and keeps everyone happy

City of Casey 365,000 and getting bigger by the day You have to wonder if we're tapping in to the huge numbers out there Free memberships to the kids? Let's face it, we're out there even after the Caulfield training base gets built (and that won't be until at least 2028 if it goes ahead) In the meantime, the club needs to embrace the locals and get them on board

Not sure what all that was about but here's the real thing in 1909 (pre 'Talkies')

Demonland stood up well in this poll Over 64% had Sydney or Brisbane winning the flag Although, we did have Freo as next best with 12.82%!!

And North Melbourne lost their first 4 games in 1975 and then won their first flag that same year Has there been a team with a worse start win the flag? And how about the team that lost their last 9 home & away games but still went on to win the premiership!!

You're not telling me anything I don't already know They'll just slash further and buy cheap products that the masses want to watch. And that includes the AFL & NRL even though it seems like a lot of money In a general sense the masses decide

Fair enough but that also means that FTA is somewhat saved by the anti-siphoning laws So it's business as usual except the FTA networks need to find ways to operate profitably Slashing staff numbers for starters. Investing less in local drama etc etc. Not great news but business is business