I reckon there are few blokes sitting around at home thinking what if regarding the Brownlow Medal. Individual accolades are often played down by players. We always hear them say things like, ‘the premiership is more important’.
I just wonder whether some of these guys lay there at night and start adding up their best games in their head.
Gary Ablett Jnr was a certainty for his third medal before he did his shoulder. The media then moved onto Joel Selwood, and you would think he is firming. Nathan Fyfe cannot win it, and I don’t think he will poll enough votes anyway.
Josh Kennedy is probably one of those guys that is counting games. He faces a week, maybe two on the sidelines. In a Brownlow Medal race that could be the difference, a game or two could hurt his chances.
Dyson Heppell is thereabouts, he was my hot tip about five rounds ago. He would be counting games as well. Although it’s hard to count on nine fingers. How cruel an injury to suffer at this time of the year?
Scott Pendlebury is another big chance. He missed last week, Collingwood lost tragically to the Lions and all six votes go to them. Are Collingwood winning enough games? Is Pendles’ fitness going to rule him out when he probably needs to keep collecting votes?
Matt Priddis is a quiet achiever. He is probably looming as a big chance now. God forbid he gets injured this week. With a relatively easy game against the Demons, he’d be handing out roses for sure.
Buddy Franklin is now right in the race. Nine goals last round probably assures him the three votes and Kennedy didn’t last more than a quarter. With another game against a battling bottom side, could Buddy snare another big bag?
And what about the son of god?
We were all wondering whether Ablett had polled enough votes, some suggesting he could be sitting around 20 to 26 votes. Could that actually be enough given all the injuries to the contenders during the time he has been sidelined?
Or will his ex-teammate get the Brownlow Medal he deserves to win? There are so many questions, but gee it’s a great time of the year.
Cat
Roar Guru
The suspension, He should have been ineligible.
Michael huston
Guest
Exactly Steve. My point was that I don't rate the Brownlow as much because of that. It says little about your career, as in the case of Cooney, it said only about one year he had. So, to my original point of agreement with Gene, players like Selwood, Pendlebury, Mitchell can never win a Brownlow and still be remembered more fondly than Cooney. As a medal for the seasons best and fairest, it serves its purpose. As a judgement on how good a player is, it fails. That is why I think it's over-rated.
Peter Baudinette
Roar Guru
Are you referring to the Judd-Pavlich incident or the fact he served three weeks at the start of the season due to the 09 finals series indiscretion?
Steve
Guest
I agree Gene, my comment wasn't directed at you, it was directed at Michael and the following statement: "It showed you can have one stand-out year and win the Brownlow"
Cat
Roar Guru
I didn't think Cooney should have won it in 2009 and then the farce of 2010 happened and since then I don't rate the brownlow as highly.
Steve
Guest
Ridiculous comment. Of course someone who has a stand-out year deserves to win it. That is the point of the Brownlow...it is the best and fairest player of that year, not an accumulation of years. That is what makes it so intriguing and interesting to watch, if everyone knew who was going to win it wouldn't be worth watching.
Michael huston
Guest
Agree Gene. Growing up I found the Brownlow to be the biggest of deals. That changed when Cooney won the Brownlow. It showed you can have one stand-out year and win the Brownlow. Meanwhile players that are consistently among the best every year are yet to win (Mitchell, Pendlebury, Selwood)
Cat
Roar Guru
I'd like to see Ablett or Selwood win from a selfish standpoint, but ultimately the Brownlow isn't what it once was so no big deal.
Michael huston
Guest
Like I said on a past post, I think it's between Selwood, Ablett, Kennedy, Franklin and Lewis. They're on winning sides, and they're usually the top culprits in those sides performances. The obvious exception is Ablett, but I think given the umpires love him and he racks up possessions even on a losing day, he should still get votes even in some of the Suns losing games. The smokies for me are Heppell, Priddis, Gray and Rockliff. They're all in average sides at best (besides Gray), and we're past the era where we look at the brilliance of someone from a losing team soldiering on and instead look for the contributors to the win. And I think there's somewhat of a gap between that first group and the second. Interestingly, I don't give Pendlebury a hope in hell. He's had an average year by his standards, and I don't even have him in my All Australian team this year. It's a shame too, the Brownlow seemed to be either his or Selwoods for the taking.