The Roar
The Roar

AFL
Advertisement

There's a better way to decide the AFL's best player

Roar Guru
22nd September, 2010
16
2029 Reads

When I sat down to write my weekly column yesterday, I had intended to focus on the upcoming Grand Final, the biggest day on the footy calendar. Instead, though, I’ve been startled by the fallout to Chris Judd’s Brownlow Medal win this week and needed to get it off my chest.

A lot has been said about Judd winning the AFL’s highest individual award ahead of pre-count favourites like Dane Swan and Gary Ablett.

Even Judd, during his acceptance speech on the night, appeared apologetic about gatecrashing Swan’s grand moment.

The Roar’s own Michael DiFabrizio had his say earlier in the week when he posed the question “was Judd the best player in the league this season?”

And that’s the key to the debate.

There’s too many flaws with the current Brownlow format which means the medal doesn’t achieve what it sets out to achieve. That being, determining the best player in the league for an entire home-and-away season. It is, after all, known as AFL footy’s top individual award.

Nevertheless, the Brownlow format shouldn’t be discredited. The idea of votes being awarded for every single game is something which works for me.

Taken without this approach, like the AFLPA’s MVP (Leigh Matthews Trophy) is, means it becomes too easy to lump a season into one and point to someone like Swan, as the standout from the minor premiers with truckloads of disposals, as the best player in the league.

Advertisement

Every game on its merits gives the Brownlow credibility and media awards which follow this approach deserve respect.

The issue for me with the Brownlow’s format along these lines is there’s no flexibility to it. Every game is judged as a 3-2-1, even when it’s a crucial top-of-the-table clash.

Also every best-on-ground performance is judged as worthy of three votes, while next best gets two, which appears too rigid.

For example, on the weekend I witnessed the WAFL Grand Final where former Richmond player Andrew Krakouer was amazing with over 40 possessions and the winning goal in Swan Districts one-point win over Claremont.

He single-handedly won Swans the premiership. There was nobody near him in influence and quality on the ground, yet with a Brownlow approach he’d only get 3 votes, the next best player 2 and so on. That’s far too rigid and each performance must be judged on its merits, like The Age or The Sunday Footy Show do.

The issue with those media awards, though, is finding the reliable, respected and credible people to decide who gets the votes. The fear is statistics often affect the rationale behind the votes. This is why those awards don’t receive the attention and get the credibility the Brownlow gets.

The same issue of the judges’ credibility arises with the Brownlow and the AFLPA.

Advertisement

Sure the umpires, who decide the votes for the Brownlow, are right there in the thick of the action but in my opinion they should focus on umpiring rather than who’s going to get in their 3-2-1.

Also with the AFLPA’s MVP the players aren’t really the best judges of the award as they don’t watch every game on its merits and nor do they vote in this way. Ask any footballer if he’s seen every single game this season and they’ll laugh at you!

On that, in my opinion, it would take the AFL to decide upon a select panel of respected and credible judges to award the votes for every single game on its merits, without the rigidity of a 3-2-1.

Perhaps a dozen or so credible judges who could travel round in twos or threes to every game each weekend to see them live and hand out the votes would work.

The question I guess is does the AFL really want a logical, credible and respected individual award every season, or are they happy blindly following tradition (and neglecting the Dane Swans, Wayne Careys and Gary Ablett Snrs)?

For me, it makes perfect sense to break from tradition and find something more logical and rational. The AFL owes it to the players who deserve their due credit.

close