AFL 2010

[bennymacca]

its probably a little like andrew mcleod vs simon goodwin.

mcleod could get 21 touches and be best on ground, whereas goodwin's impact was through his consistency (and penetration with his kick, but you get the idea)

[David]

I'm talking more so about the perception of the public with his win - not of the umpires giving him votes.

I ASSURe you there are games where Swan, Ablett, Judd etc all received votes where they maybe should've got less, or none - and games that were the opposite

Ablett said exactly that after the count.

[bennymacca]

I'm talking more so about the perception of the public with his win - not of the umpires giving him votes.

I ASSURe you there are games where Swan, Ablett, Judd etc all received votes where they maybe should've got less, or none - and games that were the opposite

Ablett said exactly that after the count.

ok. yep i agree with this.

[Swanky]

I just can't fathom how I didn't poll a single vote AGAIN!

The Brownlow is rigged!

[maccatak11]

use google scholar matthew

found an abstract by kevin norton first link, but you have to pay to get it. maybe you can go through the university website to get access to it.

http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?q= ... =en&tab=ws

cheers for posting the link benny the cunt, yeah thats the article i was talking about. i dont have privelages to access it through uni databases any more (maybe somebody on the forum does), but that study done was actually pretty important, and the main reason why a lot of this debate started/intensified.

[trishan]

cheers for posting the link benny the cunt, yeah thats the article i was talking about. i dont have privelages to access it through uni databases any more (maybe somebody on the forum does), but that study done was actually pretty important, and the main reason why a lot of this debate started/intensified.[/quote]

Had a look and unfortunately of all the journals available - this is not one.

[bennymacca]

i might see if the work library has access to it later today

[bennymacca]

this sums the whole judd thing up quite well i think

THE cold hard reality of the Brownlow Medal is if you can't regularly poll three votes, you just can't win.

Judd is the king of the eye-catching three-vote performance, while Dane Swan has made a living flying under the radar.

It was why players like Chris Judd and Adam Goodes are always value come Brownlow Medal night, and why Swan may never win the award.

We would love to say we told you so yesterday in The Buzz, but we are still too busy counting our losses.

Brendon Goddard bombed, the $3 Ablett-Swan quinella failed too, and as a result the bookies are rolling in cash.

Swan was always ridiculously short at $1.80, and Ablett too long at $5.

But who could have accounted for the fickle decision-making of the umpires?

No one begrudges Judd's win - he is too good a player not to be a multiple winner across his career.

But Swan was clearly the outstanding player of the season.

What escaped us after Ablett's run-away eight-vote win last year was that the Brownlow has never been, and will never be, a favourite's award.

Not when umpires can award a player three votes in a 53-point loss, or two votes when smashed by Adam McPhee.

But those votes votes awarded to Judd last night got him over the line.

[gmatical]

Jordan Lewis Disagrees with you Harps

[Stubbyholder]

were YOU there harps? have you played the game at the highest level?

i have seen my fair share of footy, both past and present.

im not gonna bother arguing with you harps, it is clear you can't present a proper argument, so why should i put the effort in to do the same.

pull your head in and maybe we can have some rational debate instead of acting like a fool.

ROFLMA


can you please define "proper argument "so I can get into the old versus new debate. ya fool