Who will win the brownlow? The answers here

[LiveTheDream]

i reckon you are kidding yourself schezza! bets like that are the reason the TAB make so much money

[roo boys!]

Going to be a hotly contested one this year! :o

[Memphistopheles]

Charlie will go to a midfielder again this year, but I really hate that it always one who wins.

And, although there wasn't someone able to do it this year I think that in the modern game if a full forward kicks 100 goals they have to go close to winning the medal.

The feat has only been achieved twice in the last 15 years (Buddy in 2008 and Lockett in 1998). Buddy came sixth although he was ineligible due to suspension) and Lockett 12th.

No ruckman have really come close - Sandilands is the best in recent times.

Cox, Goldstein and Mumford have had great years this season, but none of them is likely to close to winning the medal (Cox might be top 5 if lucky).

And, what about key defenders? Darren Glass is the All-Australian fullback, but will he poll many votes - no.

There needs to be a new system of voting in my opinion to make things a bit fairer to all players.

The reason the umpires choose midfielders more often than not is because they are the players they can see best. I bet the umps never look to see how many times the ruckmen tap it to advantage because they are too busy looking for free kicks among the mids/taggers.

After the game when they think about the match they will be thinking about the players who were running around under their noses all game, not the key defender who shut down the oppositions best forward or the forward who kicked four crucial goals, but didn't touch the ball much for the rest of the match.

Perhaps a voting panel which decides the votes for each game after every round. From people who aren't umpiring the game.

Or if you want to stick with the umpires doing the votes don't just get the umpires who officiated the game's opinion. Have another 3-6 umpires involved in the process - ones that watched the game not officiated in it.

That way the field umps can say who they thought was good and the others can mention anyone they might have missed.

[madskill55]

For the next couple of days, people who are interested in chatting with other passionate followers of the brownlow about opinions/ideas/betting advice/personal counts should all hop onto the following fanfooty chat between 8pm-10pm (melbourne time) or even during the day between wednesday 21st septmeber to brownlow night. this way all people can interact and have all their questions asked.

the fanfooty chat is as follows: http://www.ffelitechat.webs.com/

So come on and join in the discussion....

[FisherSaints]

What do you think about Raphael Clarke is it worth taking a punt. Jokes what about Nicky dal

[madskill55]

What do you think about Raphael Clarke is it worth taking a punt. Jokes what about Nicky dal

nicky d will poll somewhere between 19-23 votes...whether its enough to be in the top 5/top 3 only time will tell

[upthemaidens]

Charlie will go to a midfielder again this year, but I really hate that it always one who wins.

And, although there wasn't someone able to do it this year I think that in the modern game if a full forward kicks 100 goals they have to go close to winning the medal.

The feat has only been achieved twice in the last 15 years (Buddy in 2008 and Lockett in 1998). Buddy came sixth although he was ineligible due to suspension) and Lockett 12th.

No ruckman have really come close - Sandilands is the best in recent times.

Cox, Goldstein and Mumford have had great years this season, but none of them is likely to close to winning the medal (Cox might be top 5 if lucky).

And, what about key defenders? Darren Glass is the All-Australian fullback, but will he poll many votes - no.

There needs to be a new system of voting in my opinion to make things a bit fairer to all players.

The reason the umpires choose midfielders more often than not is because they are the players they can see best. I bet the umps never look to see how many times the ruckmen tap it to advantage because they are too busy looking for free kicks among the mids/taggers.

After the game when they think about the match they will be thinking about the players who were running around under their noses all game, not the key defender who shut down the oppositions best forward or the forward who kicked four crucial goals, but didn't touch the ball much for the rest of the match.

Perhaps a voting panel which decides the votes for each game after every round. From people who aren't umpiring the game.

Or if you want to stick with the umpires doing the votes don't just get the umpires who officiated the game's opinion. Have another 3-6 umpires involved in the process - ones that watched the game not officiated in it.

That way the field umps can say who they thought was good and the others can mention anyone they might have missed.

there are lots of different medals and awards given by lots of different people,,i.e. (commentators,players,coaches) and generally its midfielders that win them aswell.  so its not just the umpires that recognise these players..
  also i guess its a numbers thing, there are more midfielders than key forwards or backs so mids will win more often.
shutdown players should be given more votes, but i guess its not attractive footy. Ling's weekly tag has more impact on a game than almost anyhing else,but he will never get a vote for it  and not just in brownlow.
   i think teams B&F is a much fairer guide to a players ability

[Memphistopheles]

there are lots of different medals and awards given by lots of different people,,i.e. (commentators,players,coaches) and generally its midfielders that win them aswell.  so its not just the umpires that recognise these players..
  also i guess its a numbers thing, there are more midfielders than key forwards or backs so mids will win more often.
shutdown players should be given more votes, but i guess its not attractive footy. Ling's weekly tag has more impact on a game than almost anyhing else,but he will never get a vote for it  and not just in brownlow.
   i think teams B&F is a much fairer guide to a players ability

What you're saying about the shutdown players is exactly the problem. A key defender that negates an in-form Buddy Franklin or Travis Cloke has played just as crucial a role in a team winning than someone who has touched the ball 30 times. But the umpires are less likely to remember this when voting, the players in their mind are the ones getting lots of the votes.

Which is why there should be a different system of voting

What would happen if three Hawthorn players completely shut out Swan, Pendles and Thomas this week and the Hawks win. Would you give the votes to someone like Buddy or Mitchell if they get 3-4 goals and 30 odd possessions respectively, or to the shut-down players?

The players that shut out the Collingwood guns would be much more deserving IMO as they are the ones who have won the game for the Hawks.

Quite often stopping an opposing team's best player is crucial to winning a match, yet it is not rewarded with votes.

Another example perhaps could be Gibson's recent effort with 27 spoils. I doubt if that was a game where votes were awarded that he would get 3 votes, probably not even any votes, even though it was his good work which kept the Hawks in the game.

[Usman]

Goodes slightly overhyped i think personally max that he will poll is 23 and thats not good enough compared to the years that Judd (27), Pendles(25), Murphy (24) and Swan(24) have had it should be in that order with Goodes tying for 5th with Ablett on 21 Very high polling count at the top this year.

[PowerBug]

I am good friends with the other person who voted Marc Murphy. (well, i need to know who it is first)

I say Murph 1
GAJ 2
Judd and NDS 3

[CFC 1979]

don't count James Kelly from the cats out

but i think it will be a draw - JUDD + PENDLES

[LF]

I reckon Ablett is a chance I'm picking him as my roughie

[PowerBug]

I am good friends with the other person who voted Marc Murphy. (well, i need to know who it is first)

I say Murph 1
GAJ 2
Judd and NDS 3

Well, i change my mind actually, can't change my vote though.

1: Mitchell
2: Murphy
3: Goodes
4: Ablett
5: NDS
6: Judd

I feel that the umps will over-correct when giving out votes to Judd, they'll expect more from him thus i see Murphy getting him.

[plugz19]

i have also did

I stopped reading there.

HAHAHAH

[North Melbournes Finest]

Murphy off to 6 votes and I think Judd has none. Is that good for my trio Murphy - Judd - Pendles?