This year isn’t the year to debate for him not winning it as had a great mid season but he started slow and finished decent. Last year…well you can complain about it all you want because he was the best player.
@@dylansomewhereYou're right however this year was weird because there was no way he didn't get at least 20 votes, especially seeing some of the games he didn't poll in
That’s only one award (it just so happens to be the most prestigious award) . The coaches have their own award, the players have their own award and a lot of media have their own award.
Who else would vote on it? Media people? Personally I don't have an issue with an umpires perspective taking into account players attitudes and demeaner during the heat of the contest. With concussion rules and subsequent penalties resulting in minor indiscretions based on outcomes remove the "fairest" component, missed games is enough penalty.
I've defended the Brownlow for years but the results this year show changes NEED to be made . I've got no issues with Cripps winning but it's clear from the numbers this year threw up were WILD !
If the Brownlow is taken from the umpires, it ceases to be the Brownlow Medal (as originally planned) and becomes something else... The 4 Field umpires are the ones who decide the votes, and the field umpires are mostly in the middle of the ground - low and behold, mid-fielders predominate... What if, ALL the umpires have a say... Field, Boundary, and Goal umpires... Maybe they all vote 3 2 1 and the three players who gain the most votes from all the umpires, are the 3 2 1 for that match?
We all collectively agree that the umpires have no idea. They are the most complained about part of the game. Every week we abuse them. Every week they confuses us and anger us. Then we let them decide the most prestigious individual award in the game. MAKE IT MAKE SENSE
The Least respected award in football Next to All Australian Selection and Hall of Fame Selection. A night for the partners of Midfielders to dress up which has nothing to do with football.
Most players dont view the Brownlow medal as the greatest individual award. I would rank three awards that Players value highly: The Norm Smith Medal Premiership Medal Best and Fairest for their club. I would rank the coaches award for the best player and the Gary Ayers medal for the best finals player as equal or perhaps higher than the Brownlow medal. And lets not forget ALL Australian selection. Having in said that I still favour the ongoing tradition of awarding an Umpire assessed Brownlow medal for the best and fairest player in any given game. There are enough awards floating around for players to be recognised.
I think the umpires should rewatch the game with only the audio from their mics and a stat sheet. They could make notes about players and the game meaning they could put everything into context. Keep the 321 voting just allow them to get it right. Making them pick the votes after running 15kms and worrying about 50 other things is not conducive to accuracy.
I have a heap of old football sections of newspapers and an Aunty of mine was a mad Hawthorn supporter and dedicated scrapbooker. I checked for statistics. In 1970 there was nothing more than goals. In 1973 they had individual goals, team kicks, marks, out of bounds and frees all broken down quarter by quarter and crowd size "estimates" By 1986 there is individual player kicks (quarter by quarter) marks, frees, goals and behinds. I could narrow it down further but it is somewhat thorough by 86. In 86 there was also an article bemoaning the nees for advertising at half time in the grand final.
I agree with some and disagree with other parts of this. You just can not have coaches voting, conflict of interest is too big an issue. Perhaps the reserve umpire or umpires in the video room could do it rather than umpires on the field. They should definitely have access to stats. Comparing number of votes one year to another or even to the player who won to a player with half of his votes is just a mistake. The Brownlow is not a percentage based ranking system. Otherwise a player who gets two votes is twice as good as a player who gets one, that is just flawed logic. Looking back and saying that Bont has been the best player in the league for five (or however many) years does not mean that he had the best individual season, you can't reward a player this year because he was also good last year. I would be happy with a 5-4-3-2-1 vote system or even if there were 15 (or 20 or however many) votes total to be spread however they see fit. I am also not concerned about the award being midfielder centric, that is just a reflection of the game, you rely on your midfielders at every contest every week. Even in your example, you had to go back 16 years to suggeat Buddy may have done better than Cooney. I do 100% agree with suspensions being a silly thing to rule somebody out of contention. The fact that they miss games is penalty enough as they can't get votes in games they don't play. All in all I don't see any major problems, I don't think we get any non deserving winners.
I reckon the umpires are all short and are sympathetic to smaller players and midfielders. I was actually a tall ruckman as a junior. When I took up umpiring in juniors I often voted for a key position player or a ruckman. Its just that I appreciated their play more.
I watched the sen sports discussion on this. The thing is if you look at the coaching award, look at their top 10 then the Brownlow top 10 it is nearly the same
The coaches award is the best award to judge the best player. On the day the coàches know who is playing good or bad. Its their job to know what exactly going on.
What you don't take into consideration was how many votes taken off players. Cripps and Daicos had so few votes taken off them by teammates, Bontompelli had a heap of votes take by Treloar who honestly was probably better than Bont this year, although when Bont dominates he stands out so much more,
Yeah but when Dusty won it in 2017 with 36 votes, the next best Richmond player was Cotchin on 8. That's a one-man show right there, and still Cripps beat him by 9 votes. And Richmond won 15 games for 80 total votes that year for him to reach 36 votes. Carlton won 13 this year and still polled 86. The maths doesn't work, and that's what people are upset about.
@@pjblack9290 I don't disagree with you, Cripps was overs by at least 10 votes and Daicos by about 6, I was more referring to people being upset at Bontompelli's votes. Cripps really didn't have many votes taken from him because he got 12 3's and the next best at Collingwood was 8 votes.
I think it could be a weighted system, the umpires will vote as they do, and there votes have say a 30% weight to who wins, the coaches could do the same.with say a 50% weighting, and perhaps an alumni of brownlpe medal winners could also have some weight and the best player of a bigger cross section of people might see a voting system better reflecting how good a player really is.
Cripps basically was the sole reason why carlton finished 8th, seeing that he got 45 and the closest was 16 for Carlton, and cripps got more votes than the whole west coast team, yet 2 kangaroos players got past double digits.
My only issue with the coaches votes is that coaches are biased towards their players and could give a certain player more votes then they deserve to help them win the award. There allegations of macrae doing this and giving daicos 5 in the last round
Could it be argued that the reason umpires are charged with voting because they are arguably the least conflicted when it comes to players, clubs, coaches etc and their respective biases and agendas? As for best and fairest, could we not hypothetically split it into two separate awards? The criteria simply needs to be updated to reflect the ease of which suspensions are earned in the modern era. Alternatively, could it be feasible to have a Brownlow medal awared to each of the main positions, e g., forwards, mids, rucks and defenders?
Cripps is a gun and deserving brownlow winner although the fact he won by so much proves he has the ability to leave a big impact on the umpires. Lets use Cameron Smith as an example, he had the refs in his back pocket and he would influence them in decisions on the field. Im not going as far to say that Cripps does that but I think he has a way of building a relationship so to speak with them during the game and as captains they can. We can all agree he didnt dominate the season like his votes replicate. He knows how to leave an impression on the umpires. The fact he is in top 3 for votes anyway or close to it, makes it easier for the umps imo. Speculating but its that or they all bet on him lol.
Cripps has 2 brownlows and looks like conor nash with ball in hand, athletics and diamond league is not AFL. Only thing that buys respect is premireships and thats why they're so hard to win.
I actually didnt even watch a single second and watched austin powers instead, best decision ever. Now its grand final week, no one gives a fuck about any award bar Grand Final medallions and Maybe Norm Smith. Apart from that rookie of year, goal of year, midifeld brownlow its all PR awards for people who know nothing of the game.
In fairness to Cripps his teammates were dogshit this year for the most part and he carried them every week. Same with Daicos. I'm generalising a bit but game in game out they were their teams best players every week. Other players had legitimate contenders to steal votes over the rounds and they didn't really.
U only gotta look at west coast as a perfect example of how biased the brownlow is towards mids. Harley got 7 votes and was our equal 2nd highest polling player..8th in the b and f. Gov was all aus and our b and f winner...0 votes
Cripps is a poor ball user for the most part, Bont is a class above, but Chipps is the AFL's absolute pet so if they couldn't give him more than 3 a game they would. Watch the AFL do everything they can again next year to try prop Cartel back into the top 4 and get them to a GF, farce favouritism.
Bont is a better ball user, but I personally think Cripps impacts the game more and most of Carlton’s come from behinds or when they went on a roll for a quarter or 2, it was always on the back of Cripps setting the tone.
This is a moronic opinion. Bont averages more turnovers on less dispoasals and a lower overall disposal efficencey this season. You may not like Cripps (which is almost as illogical as your argument) but you can't deny that he is a freak.
Cripps got 45 votes out of a possible 69. He had a great season and was a worthy winner but he was not head and shoulders above the comp during the season.
True but he was head and shoulders above his team-mates so he attracted an undue amount of attention. Look at how many votes Sydney's top3 mids got together and u see its more about how much u grab the attention of the umps than whether or not u actually are the best. But also cripps and daicos were the favs so they got the result right at least, even if the votes were out of whack
I haven't watched the vid yet but it needs to be taken away from the umpires. Give it to the coaches or something or atleast let the umpires look at stats and converse after the game. Also i think instead of 3, 2, 1 that maybe 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 would be better (Although the brownlow would then go til like midnight lol )
Just went into Hawks HQ at mulgrave the other day and in musseum and all rooms not 1 brownlow replica or recognition piece to players whove won is even in there 😂 shows you what clubs think of the award internally, even if they have won it. Nothing award for a Nothing night. Just my opinion on it I'm sure midifelders who are technically awful at the game but rack touches will disagree with me.
How has bont not won one, I love crippa but bont has been deserving so often.
This year wasn’t his year
Been deserving twice and lost one fairly and got blatantly robbed last year. Never had a more brownlow worthy season compared to those who won it.
This year isn’t the year to debate for him not winning it as had a great mid season but he started slow and finished decent. Last year…well you can complain about it all you want because he was the best player.
@@dylansomewhereYou're right however this year was weird because there was no way he didn't get at least 20 votes, especially seeing some of the games he didn't poll in
@@alexanderfarah oh definitely agree! But Treloar is deserving of his flowers 🤙🏻
Umpires deciding the best player of the year is ridiculous
That’s only one award (it just so happens to be the most prestigious award) .
The coaches have their own award, the players have their own award and a lot of media have their own award.
That's what the Brownlow is. Deal with it
Who else would vote on it? Media people? Personally I don't have an issue with an umpires perspective taking into account players attitudes and demeaner during the heat of the contest. With concussion rules and subsequent penalties resulting in minor indiscretions based on outcomes remove the "fairest" component, missed games is enough penalty.
I've defended the Brownlow for years but the results this year show changes NEED to be made . I've got no issues with Cripps winning but it's clear from the numbers this year threw up were WILD !
If the Brownlow is taken from the umpires, it ceases to be the Brownlow Medal (as originally planned) and becomes something else...
The 4 Field umpires are the ones who decide the votes, and the field umpires are mostly in the middle of the ground - low and behold, mid-fielders predominate...
What if, ALL the umpires have a say... Field, Boundary, and Goal umpires... Maybe they all vote 3 2 1 and the three players who gain the most votes from all the umpires, are the 3 2 1 for that match?
We all collectively agree that the umpires have no idea. They are the most complained about part of the game. Every week we abuse them. Every week they confuses us and anger us. Then we let them decide the most prestigious individual award in the game. MAKE IT MAKE SENSE
Brownlow needs to be like the NBA league MVP. A group of industry people each cast their vote with all the information at their disposal.
The Least respected award in football Next to All Australian Selection and Hall of Fame Selection. A night for the partners of Midfielders to dress up which has nothing to do with football.
Yep, ladies night
Most players dont view the Brownlow medal as the greatest individual award.
I would rank three awards that Players value highly:
The Norm Smith Medal
Premiership Medal
Best and Fairest for their club.
I would rank the coaches award for the best player and the Gary Ayers medal for the best finals player as equal or perhaps higher than the Brownlow medal. And lets not forget ALL Australian selection.
Having in said that I still favour the ongoing tradition of awarding an Umpire assessed Brownlow medal for the best and fairest player in any given game.
There are enough awards floating around for players to be recognised.
I think the umpires should rewatch the game with only the audio from their mics and a stat sheet.
They could make notes about players and the game meaning they could put everything into context.
Keep the 321 voting just allow them to get it right. Making them pick the votes after running 15kms and worrying about 50 other things is not conducive to accuracy.
The Brownlow seems more like a ceremony these days. Its not about the award itself
The umpires/umpiring is the sole reason the afl cannot seem to expand overseas
I have a heap of old football sections of newspapers and an Aunty of mine was a mad Hawthorn supporter and dedicated scrapbooker. I checked for statistics. In 1970 there was nothing more than goals. In 1973 they had individual goals, team kicks, marks, out of bounds and frees all broken down quarter by quarter and crowd size "estimates"
By 1986 there is individual player kicks (quarter by quarter) marks, frees, goals and behinds.
I could narrow it down further but it is somewhat thorough by 86.
In 86 there was also an article bemoaning the nees for advertising at half time in the grand final.
I agree with some and disagree with other parts of this. You just can not have coaches voting, conflict of interest is too big an issue. Perhaps the reserve umpire or umpires in the video room could do it rather than umpires on the field. They should definitely have access to stats. Comparing number of votes one year to another or even to the player who won to a player with half of his votes is just a mistake. The Brownlow is not a percentage based ranking system. Otherwise a player who gets two votes is twice as good as a player who gets one, that is just flawed logic.
Looking back and saying that Bont has been the best player in the league for five (or however many) years does not mean that he had the best individual season, you can't reward a player this year because he was also good last year.
I would be happy with a 5-4-3-2-1 vote system or even if there were 15 (or 20 or however many) votes total to be spread however they see fit. I am also not concerned about the award being midfielder centric, that is just a reflection of the game, you rely on your midfielders at every contest every week. Even in your example, you had to go back 16 years to suggeat Buddy may have done better than Cooney.
I do 100% agree with suspensions being a silly thing to rule somebody out of contention. The fact that they miss games is penalty enough as they can't get votes in games they don't play.
All in all I don't see any major problems, I don't think we get any non deserving winners.
I reckon the umpires are all short and are sympathetic to smaller players and midfielders. I was actually a tall ruckman as a junior. When I took up umpiring in juniors I often voted for a key position player or a ruckman. Its just that I appreciated their play more.
I watched the sen sports discussion on this. The thing is if you look at the coaching award, look at their top 10 then the Brownlow top 10 it is nearly the same
The coaches award is the best award to judge the best player. On the day the coàches know who is playing good or bad. Its their job to know what exactly going on.
This is so easily fixed. Umps do their votes. Then add on the coaches votes, who get the most gets 3 votes, next best gets 2....etc..
Everything about the game has changed except the Brownlow Medal.
What you don't take into consideration was how many votes taken off players. Cripps and Daicos had so few votes taken off them by teammates, Bontompelli had a heap of votes take by Treloar who honestly was probably better than Bont this year, although when Bont dominates he stands out so much more,
Yeah but when Dusty won it in 2017 with 36 votes, the next best Richmond player was Cotchin on 8. That's a one-man show right there, and still Cripps beat him by 9 votes. And Richmond won 15 games for 80 total votes that year for him to reach 36 votes. Carlton won 13 this year and still polled 86. The maths doesn't work, and that's what people are upset about.
@@pjblack9290 I don't disagree with you, Cripps was overs by at least 10 votes and Daicos by about 6, I was more referring to people being upset at Bontompelli's votes. Cripps really didn't have many votes taken from him because he got 12 3's and the next best at Collingwood was 8 votes.
Take your West coast model to score the whole game, but then just take the top 3 points getters from the game for the brownlow votes.
I think it could be a weighted system, the umpires will vote as they do, and there votes have say a 30% weight to who wins, the coaches could do the same.with say a 50% weighting, and perhaps an alumni of brownlpe medal winners could also have some weight and the best player of a bigger cross section of people might see a voting system better reflecting how good a player really is.
Cripps basically was the sole reason why carlton finished 8th, seeing that he got 45 and the closest was 16 for Carlton, and cripps got more votes than the whole west coast team, yet 2 kangaroos players got past double digits.
Needs to be a midfielder brownlow, forward brownlow, and defender brownlow
My only issue with the coaches votes is that coaches are biased towards their players and could give a certain player more votes then they deserve to help them win the award. There allegations of macrae doing this and giving daicos 5 in the last round
Could it be argued that the reason umpires are charged with voting because they are arguably the least conflicted when it comes to players, clubs, coaches etc and their respective biases and agendas?
As for best and fairest, could we not hypothetically split it into two separate awards? The criteria simply needs to be updated to reflect the ease of which suspensions are earned in the modern era.
Alternatively, could it be feasible to have a Brownlow medal awared to each of the main positions, e g., forwards, mids, rucks and defenders?
Key problem with everything AFL now
‘Corporatisation’
I think you automatically run into comflict of interest issues, perveived and real if coaches are deciding the votes.
Cripps is a gun and deserving brownlow winner although the fact he won by so much proves he has the ability to leave a big impact on the umpires. Lets use Cameron Smith as an example, he had the refs in his back pocket and he would influence them in decisions on the field. Im not going as far to say that Cripps does that but I think he has a way of building a relationship so to speak with them during the game and as captains they can. We can all agree he didnt dominate the season like his votes replicate. He knows how to leave an impression on the umpires. The fact he is in top 3 for votes anyway or close to it, makes it easier for the umps imo. Speculating but its that or they all bet on him lol.
Cripps has 2 brownlows and looks like conor nash with ball in hand, athletics and diamond league is not AFL. Only thing that buys respect is premireships and thats why they're so hard to win.
Ironic considering I'm sure you glaze bontempelli more than cripps even tho bont is statiscally worse with ball in hand than cripps.
The way Hamish McLachlan sucks his favourite players off is sickening.
Umpires have always voted for the Brownlow
At best, it's a popularity contest
I actually didnt even watch a single second and watched austin powers instead, best decision ever. Now its grand final week, no one gives a fuck about any award bar Grand Final medallions and Maybe Norm Smith. Apart from that rookie of year, goal of year, midifeld brownlow its all PR awards for people who know nothing of the game.
Cuz won it in 2005 with a low count due to having to compete with prime Kerr and Judd.
Champion data started in 1999
Brownlow is certainly losing its shine
In fairness to Cripps his teammates were dogshit this year for the most part and he carried them every week. Same with Daicos. I'm generalising a bit but game in game out they were their teams best players every week. Other players had legitimate contenders to steal votes over the rounds and they didn't really.
Fix the headline to everything that is wrong with the AA captain. Cripps had by far a better year . As a captain and player
U only gotta look at west coast as a perfect example of how biased the brownlow is towards mids. Harley got 7 votes and was our equal 2nd highest polling player..8th in the b and f. Gov was all aus and our b and f winner...0 votes
Cripps is a poor ball user for the most part, Bont is a class above, but Chipps is the AFL's absolute pet so if they couldn't give him more than 3 a game they would.
Watch the AFL do everything they can again next year to try prop Cartel back into the top 4 and get them to a GF, farce favouritism.
Bont is a better ball user, but I personally think Cripps impacts the game more and most of Carlton’s come from behinds or when they went on a roll for a quarter or 2, it was always on the back of Cripps setting the tone.
This is a moronic opinion. Bont averages more turnovers on less dispoasals and a lower overall disposal efficencey this season. You may not like Cripps (which is almost as illogical as your argument) but you can't deny that he is a freak.
Cripps got 45 votes out of a possible 69. He had a great season and was a worthy winner but he was not head and shoulders above the comp during the season.
True but he was head and shoulders above his team-mates so he attracted an undue amount of attention. Look at how many votes Sydney's top3 mids got together and u see its more about how much u grab the attention of the umps than whether or not u actually are the best. But also cripps and daicos were the favs so they got the result right at least, even if the votes were out of whack
Yeah, he had no one taking votes from him at Carlton especially with Walsh having a down year.
All your problems revolve around who won
I haven't watched the vid yet but it needs to be taken away from the umpires. Give it to the coaches or something or atleast let the umpires look at stats and converse after the game. Also i think instead of 3, 2, 1 that maybe 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 would be better (Although the brownlow would then go til like midnight lol )
true
Just went into Hawks HQ at mulgrave the other day and in musseum and all rooms not 1 brownlow replica or recognition piece to players whove won is even in there 😂 shows you what clubs think of the award internally, even if they have won it. Nothing award for a Nothing night. Just my opinion on it I'm sure midifelders who are technically awful at the game but rack touches will disagree with me.
Start by taking it out of the hands of the UMPIRES 😡
Just once I would love to see a non Carlton person approve of anything the blues achieve ,
Just once 🙏