Brownlow Medal 2024

[azabob]

Bont polling lower than expected is actually a really good thing - clearly there was less reliance on him to shoot the lights out for us this year, and we got a for more even spread of contributors throughout the season. The "Bont or bust" years of 2021-2023 are thankfully behind us - they are obviously not behind Carlton, who are in a world of hurt until Cripps gets some proper help from the next tier. Ditto Collingwood with Daicos (unfortunately those pricks pinched one last year).

Bont's seasons in 2021 and 2023 were individually far better than 2024 IMO.

Is Sedat low key the biggest optimist on this board?

[Boots]

I don’t watch it but I care a bit too much that Bont wins one one year. Sadly I fear he was closest in 2021.

[hujsh]

Richards with 6 votes. Expect that to change next year now that the umps know he's meant to be a good midfielder

[Sedat]

Is Sedat low key the biggest optimist on this board?

The QF debacle shook my optimism a bit, but I can definitely see what we were doing as a collective coaching group in 2024 (both tactically and personnel wise) to better adapt to the pace/ball movement expectations of today's footy compared to the antiquated "stoppage/territory domination or die" rubbish that we dished up in 2022-23.

My optimism doesn't quite extend to our ruck set-up.

[DOG GOD]

I watched it til round 3 when Bont had 32 disposals etc and got 0 votes, so turned it off. I could see Cripps winning from there. Didn’t expect it that easily ofcourse, but I guess when the umpires give you a total of 14 votes in your last 7 games, when your team wins 2 of those games, then that says a lot of the system. And jai Newcombe gets more votes than Bont. Geez.
I haven’t watched a full count for 5-6 years.

[Hotdog60]

First time this year that I have totally not watched it. Last year was the last straw.

[Flamethrower]

It is not a coincidence that the year that produced the most controversial Brownlow count in history coincided with the year that umpiring standards hit an all-time low.

[Axe Man]

Why not let them look at the stats? Everyone else does when deciding votes and best players and it may help eliminate the howlers.

AFL umpires denied access to stats before deciding on Brownlow Medal votes

AFL umpires have had their pleas to see statistics before deciding on Brownlow Medal votes denied in the last two years, it can be revealed. JON RALPH has full details.

A delegation of senior AFL umpires have been refused access to Champion Data statistics to help them with Brownlow Medal voting despite making a direct plea to the AFL in the past two seasons.

Senior umpiring sources confirmed that the umpiring group?s leadership department have been rebuffed in the past two years despite asking to have those stats as part of their decision-making process.

The AFL umpires are adamant that they continue to nail the worthy winner of the AFL?s most prestigious individual award.

Their decision making is in line with many of the AFL?s biggest awards including the AFL MVP, AFL Coaches Awards and many of the AFL?s media awards, which are also midfielder-focused.

But increasingly with wider access to statistics and a focus on scrutinising individual votes the umpires have been pilloried for what are considered glaring mistakes by the fan base.

AFL Umpires Association boss Rob Kerr confirmed on Tuesday night there were some umpires keen to access stats, while others were less emphatic.

?Some want stats, some are a bit ambivalent. My view is there is a middle ground to be found,? he said.

?The accusation would be that (the voting) becomes driven by stats but if we let the umpires pick the best five players and then they had a look at the stats on those five players to make sure the stats confirm or challenge what they have seen, and they can adjust from there.

?There was a discussion about it 12 or 18 months ago, and probably in the end the AFL said we would rather not (use stats).?

Collingwood?s Josh Daicos didn?t poll a vote despite 34 touches in round 13, while brother Nick Daicos won a single vote despite only 15 disposals and 64 ranking points.

Harrison Petty also was awarded three votes for a 13-possession one-goal tally.

There were 17 instances where a player polled three Brownlow Medal votes but received no votes from the AFL Coaches in their own award, won by Nick Daicos.

While Carlton?s Patrick Cripps was a worthy winner of the award his 45-vote tally was an eye-opener given it was triple the tally of 1986 joint winners Robert Dipierdomenico and Greg Williams.

Recently retired AFL umpire Shane McInerney told the Herald Sun he was increasingly in favour of stats for umpires.

?The umpires do a great job but Brownlow night exposes some anomalies and takes away the focus from what was a great achievement by Patrick Cripps. The umpires would like some support and the next question is what the support is. There has been commentary in the past where umpires might have used devices (phones) at their disposal to sort through that stuff (access stats) and the AFL made sure those aids aren?t available.

?So umpires are the right group to be awarding those votes and it doesn?t need to be paralysis by analysis but some basic info would help. Get rid of the howlers. They do need some support.?

Cripps finished 26 votes ahead of the brilliant Marcus Bontempelli and polled more votes combined that bottom-three clubs West Coast, Richmond and North Melbourne.

The umpires would like stats to assist their vote polling rather than govern it, believing that after they assess about five players it would help them rule out howlers.

AFL football boss Laura Kane said early this year she was not in favour of giving statistics to umpires because she did not want a Champion Data award.

She instead believes in backing in the umpires in a unique award which she believes has stood the test of time.

But at that stage it was not known the AFL umpiring group had actually requested they be handed statistics.

The advent of the four-umpire system also means all four umpires are being used, when an emergency umpire was once able to make a Judgement on the best players in the game while watching on.

AFL umpires are told they are unable to access their phones in any way to access stats post-match after a crackdown on Brownlow Medal integrity.

The AFL is also unwilling to consider a change to the eligibility criteria for suspended players despite Isaac Heeney roaring to a five-vote lead as he polled a record 21 votes after round 10 before fading from calculations.

The league confirmed on Monday there was no consideration being given to a year-ending review of Brownlow eligibility or Rising Star eligibility despite star contenders Harley Reid and Sam Darcy missing out on the award judging the game?s best young talent after suspensions.

Heeney was suspended for a week for a strike on Jimmy Webster using an MRO rule change that had come in for the first time this year in the 100-year history of the Brownlow Medal.

At every other time in the history of the game he would have been eligible to win the Brownlow Medal because he would have been fined rather than suspended for his accidental strike to Webster?s face.

[bornadog]

Why not let them look at the stats? Everyone else does when deciding votes and best players and it may help eliminate the howlers.

.

If we are going to stick with tradition, ie umpires award, I would even let them watch the replay before putting in the votes.

[Happy Days]

I don’t think the problem is that they’re looking at stats, I think the problem is they don’t put any thought into their votes and just default to giving them to 1 or 2 guys every week regardless of performance. This vote count had the least players getting votes in nearly 40 years.

[Sedat]

I don’t think the problem is that they’re looking at stats, I think the problem is they don’t put any thought into their votes and just default to giving them to 1 or 2 guys every week regardless of performance. This vote count had the least players getting votes in nearly 40 years.

100% this. All the media fapping over the stars has resulted in every award now being condensed to the absolute topliner mids only. It's only to be expected that the umpires follow suit.

[josie]

If we are going to stick with tradition, ie umpires award, I would even let them watch the replay before putting in the votes.

I think that?s more important than stats. Mids obtain way too many votes IMO. Influence on games often clearer after watching a replay.

[ledge]

Why wouldn’t umpires be allowed to look at stats ? Thats just insane . Umpires need as much info as possible.
Brownlow has been a joke for years , I haven’t watched it for 20 years. How can they say they don’t know who will win it when the minute they call a name for votes his highlights are up for that game 2 seconds later?
It’s a rubbish award to keep the AFL relevant.
Just read out the votes , this red carpet stuff and wags is just irrelevant.
Give me the players awards over this any day of the week. They know they actually play against these players and understand who was best at their job on the day.
Even coaches votes are a better guide.

[GVGjr]

Why wouldn’t umpires be allowed to look at stats ? Thats just insane . Umpires need as much info as possible.
Brownlow has been a joke for years , I haven’t watched it for 20 years. How can they say they don’t know who will win it when the minute they call a name for votes his highlights are up for that game 2 seconds later?

I disagree with umpires looking at stats after a game, it will just create a level of laziness and provide them with the ability to make the safer call. The award is what it is.

[Axe Man]

I disagree with umpires looking at stats after a game, it will just create a level of laziness and provide them with the ability to make the safer call. The award is what it is.

One proposal I read was they could shortlist the top 5 players as they saw it and then look at the stats to confirm their impressions, rather than looking at the stats first.

I only see this as a positive to hopefully eliminate some of the anomalies. I sometimes struggle to identify the best players sitting in the stands watching, no idea how the umpires manage it when they are rightfully concentrating on making correct decisions.