Since 1924, the Brownlow Medal has been presented to the best and fairest player in the VFL/AFL as voted by the match-day umpires.
Up until 1930 just one vote was cast per game before it was modified to the 3-2-1 system that is still in place today.
(When the VFL introduced the two-umpire system in 1976 each field umpire voted on a 3-2-1 basis before that system was abandoned ahead of the 1978 season.)
Nowadays, within half an hour of the completion of a game, the three field umpires confer and by consensus cast their votes. They reach their verdict without referring to any statistical information or receiving any external input. The votes are arrived at purely and simply from their own observations throughout the game.
But is that the best way to determine who wins the most coveted individual award in the sport?
Recent history indicates that the medal is pretty much the domain of the midfielders. Since 1994, only once has the medal gone to a non-midfielder – Sydney ruckman Adam Goodes in 2003, when he shared a three-way tie with midfielders Nathan Buckley and Mark Ricciuto.
Taking into account ties, in the past 20 seasons 22 of the 23 medallists have been midfielders.
In the preceding 20 years (1974-1993) it was a vastly different story, with the award being won on 13 occasions by non-midfielders – ruckmen (eight), back-pocket (two) and one each from centre half-forward, centre half-back and full-forward.
Perhaps it is the fact that the game has become increasingly possession driven that the midfielders have come to the fore at each count.
North Melbourne and Adelaide centre-half-forward Wayne Carey, a player regarded by many as the best of all-time, never finished better than third in the count. In 1995 and 1998, when Carey was voted by his peers the AFL Players’ Association Most Valuable Player, he finished sixth in the Brownlow count both times.
It is interesting when you marry up some of the other awards around the league with the outcome of the Brownlow Medal.
One would imagine that the AFL coaches would have a pretty fair idea of the competition’s best players – in fact an infinitely better idea than the umpires.
The coaches are the ones who determine the match-ups and in the end have the best idea of who performed best for their team and also who performed best against them.
The AFL Coaches’ Association created a player of the year award in 2003, and comparing the winner of their trophy with the Brownlow medallist each year is an interesting exercise.
In the 11 seasons since the coaches decided to bestow their own honour for the competition’s best player only three times has it married up with the Brownlow winner – Gary Ablett Jnr (2009), Goodes (2006) and Buckley (2003).
Some of the anomalies have been stark.
Last season Scott Pendlebury was the coaches’ pick and finished sixth in the Brownlow. In 2011, Marc Murphy got the coaches’ nod but was seventh in the Brownlow, 15 votes behind winner Dane Swan.
When Goodes won the Brownlow in 2006 he shared the coaches’ award with Simon Goodwin, who finished a distant eleventh in the Brownlow count.
Barry Hall was the coaches’ choice in 2005 yet came home fifth in the Brownlow, while the 2004 coaches’ award went to Warren Tredrea, who finished equal seventh in the Brownlow with half as many votes as the 30 garnered by winner Chris Judd.
Another interesting comparison can be a club’s best and fairest count. The winners of the individual club awards are again judged by the head coach, in concert with his match committee.
Those voting on the club awards have an encyclopaedic knowledge of just how well their players performed in accordance with the roles they were assigned.
Last season only five of the club B&F winners were also the highest vote winners from their team when the Brownlow votes were counted – Nat Fyfe (Fremantle), Joel Selwood (Geelong), Ablett (Gold Coast), Jeremy Cameron (GWS) and Matt Priddis (West Coast).
Brisbane’s Tom Rockliff finished fourth in the club B&F, yet equal sixth in the Brownlow with 21 votes as the Lions’ best vote winner. Richmond’s Trent Cotchin placed fifth in the club award yet was the best from the Tigers in the Brownlow with 19 votes. Daniel Hannebery was the top Sydney Swan with 21 Brownlow votes but was fourth in the club B&F.
The most staggering disparity last season was recorded by North Melbourne skipper Andrew Swallow, who failed to finish in the top 10 in his club’s award, but was the most successful player from the Roos at the Brownlow with 14 votes.
There is no doubting that coaches have a vastly different view of the game when compared to the umpires. And I would argue that the coaches’ view is a better indicator of who the most valuable player is.
Admittedly, only three times since the inception of the AFL Coaches’ Award has a non-midfielder won, but that is three times as many as the Brownlow has thrown up in the same period.
In most sports the code’s best player award is not solely judged by the match officials – if at all.
The Allan Border Medal, awarded by Cricket Australia to the best overall international player each year, has a system that sees votes awarded by the umpires, teammates and members of the cricket media, chosen on a game-by-game basis.
The Dally M medal in the NRL is chosen as a result of votes cast by the media.
The MVP in the NBA is determined by votes cast by sportswriters and broadcasters, as is the MVP in Major League Baseball.
The Norm Smith Medal, awarded to the best player in the VFL/AFL grand final since 1979 is voted on by a panel of football experts chosen by the league.
The Brownlow should not be the sole preserve of the umpires, but broadened so as to canvas more diverse input. I would still have the umpires voting, along with the two coaches and one former player who is working on the game for a media outlet.
Many may argue that the coaches will have a vested interest in promoting their own players, but if you look at the weekly votes in the current coaches’ award that is not the case.
A players’ ineligibility could still remain with respect to the ‘fairest’ component of the Brownlow – if so desired. Nowadays, the majority of player suspensions and reprimands are delivered via the match review panel without them having been raised by the umpires anyway.
Should a player be reprimanded or found guilty by the MRP or a subsequent tribunal hearing they become ineligible as they normally are.
The game at the highest level has become incredibly onerous for the umpires. The very nature of the way the game is played, having moved significantly away from the goal-to-goal-linear style of days past, has made the umpires’ job far more challenging.
To expect them to be the only arbiters of the sport’s premier individual award is no longer best for the game.
Aransan
Guest
Leave the Brownlow alone, it is always won by a very good player and the umpires have their own perspective on the game. By all means build up an alternative award as well. More theatre should be provided with an alternative award with weekly voting kept secret until the end of the season. I don't think coaches or media commentators would be capable of keeping the voting secret given their other responsibilities but there could still be another way of choosing a voting panel. It is the theatre that makes the Brownlow the award that it is.
Steele
Guest
Personally I think the coaches award is realistically the best guide. Sure it's never going to be anywhere near as prestigious, but it is the one award i really rate. Having said that, I don't want the brownlow changed. Purely for sentimental reasons only. Most keen observers are aware by now the brownlow isn't generally won by the best player anyway.
Jack Smith
Roar Guru
I'd say umpires generally get it right though...
micka
Guest
Absolutely no need for a change the system whatsoever... "But is that the best way to determine who wins the most coveted individual award in the sport?" It may be the driving force behind what made the Brownlow the most coveted individual award in the first place. The umpires have as much if not more insight into how a game is playing out than anybody else watching. For what it's worth, I have never seen a footy fan give the umpires a dose about how cr@p they are and follow through by putting their money where their mouth is and march down to their local ground to umpire a game themselves.
Jason K
Guest
The quaint old notion of an umpires' award should be upheld. It's tradition, it's unique to footy (no other sport has it) and let's admit it, the umpires do have a unique point of view that none of the rest of us see. BUT there should also be a best and fairest award that is awarded by fans/media/"experts". Maybe you have a panel of hall-of-famers assign points for the award, or just regular old retired players. Who knows? But I wouldn't throw out the umpire-determined Brownlow. You would lose something that is too unique.
MJ
Guest
I feel I'm reasonably qualified to respond given I've had to give league best and fairest votes at Under 13 level in Queensland since 2007. Certainly it isn't an easy job determining votes from an umpires' perspective when the mind often has to concentrate on getting to the next contest as I'm more often than not flying solo. If I'm on my own I try to look for consistency from a player throughout the game. Possessions do have a role (you tend to see who has the ball a lot easily), but I'm often mindful of not necessarily giving any votes to a player just because he/she has had more kicks than anyone else. Goals help but also aren't the biggest factor either. It's definitely harder in the latter rounds too because you also have in the back of the mind that not giving votes to someone who has a decent game but is in contention for the award may in fact cost someone a league B&F. I tend to look out for smaller players as well, probably to try not to notice the biggest kids too much. For the record, as our league has a send off rule (yellow card is 10 minutes in juniors with a replacement allowed, red is off for the game, an automatic report and a replacement allowed AFTER 10 minutes. It's 15 in our senior comp), any player who receives ANY card I deem to be ineligible for votes that game.
Andy_Roo
Roar Guru
Glen, suggesting that coaches have an 'infinitely' better idea of the best & fairest players than the umpires is a little insulting don't you think? Umpires are experienced football professionals and see and hear the game from a very different position to anyone else. They are also the only ones who can vote without being influenced by the statistics that everyone else is bombarded with throughout the game. Leave it with the umpires, they get it pretty right. Sure you can argue player A should have won instead of player B, but when has player B ever been considered an unworthy winner.
Mic
Guest
Would have to be called the SOS
mattyb
Guest
I like that idea a lot.maybe we should toss around some names for this medal.I'm going to kick it off and go with the Rod Carter medal which we can then all just simply call,The Tilt.has a very affectionate ring to it.
Cat
Roar Guru
You don't hear the midfielders and defenders complaining they can't possibly win a Coleman, I think we just need a real award for the defenders and every part of the ground will have an award that can be won by those who play there.
mattyb
Guest
As others have said,leave it with the umpires and perhaps stop with the perception everything needs to be changed.if your against the brownlow just hold the mvp in higher regard,if you think Caroline Wilson is unbiased and of great knowledge,the age award would be for you.there's plenty of awards,the brownlow is fine.
spruce moose
Guest
Disagree, the umpires are in the best position to see who has the ball....they are following all actions concerning the ball.
Casper
Guest
Maybe the media need to go on that course as well, as most awards are won by midfielders. I think what would happen is the umpires will still be crucified when a key position player that picked up 15 possessions gets a vote over a midfielder that gathered 35.
Radelaide
Guest
The umpires are in the best position to see and hear who is affecting the game the most and bringing about the win, the midfield position is called the engine room because they are the ones who affect the win the most, I can't think of any other way without it becoming a popularity contest.
Mark Soong
Guest
The umpires are the ones watching the match up close with high levels of intensity..digest the match analysis within 30 minutes after the match..I dont think it is fair to compare the winner of bronlow along with the club B&F..AFL players coaches award to look for consistencies due to different voting system, match analysis where they have more tme cmpared to umpires. In the last 20 years, the awards were dominated by midfielders where the current AFL playing style has evolved..midfielders can play all over the ground..kick goals..defences..and even half forward..So I believe the continuing evolvement of the AFL game some other players position will dominate the brownlow..Do not tinkle with how the current voting system..The review of the MRP will be positive if it resulted in more players eligible for the bronlow..
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
That's all fair and well Olivia, but the umpires are no longer deciding who is fair in many instances now. The MRP is deciding that and if we look at some of the decisions made this year on what is fair and unfair - do we really want the most prestigious award dictated by a bunch of chumps that are going to get the boot this year? You see next year we will have a new set of chumps and the age old debate will continue... Personally, I would keep it as it stands. However, I would change what constitutes fair play and only rub players out for Browlow contention for deliberate acts of violence or acts that are not in the spirit of the game. Accidentally clashes that are deemed negligent I don't think should be counted as unfair. Reckless acts are the middle ground and I would like to see a 3 strikes policy across a 5 year period, no different to drivers licence points wearing off. 3 Reckless acts in 5 years and you are out of contention for the Brownlow in that year. Any subsequent acts within a 5 year period would also count you out in a given year.
Cat
Roar Guru
Just need to fix 'the Judd loophole'. Players suspended in finals are don't lose their eligibility for the current season or for the following season. Needs to change.
Olivia Watts
Roar Guru
A Very Small correction, Glenn. The Charles Brownlow Trophy ( to pedantically give its full, correct name ) has 'never' been awarded to the best and fairest player in the league; always to the Fairest and Best. This suggests to me that its original intent was to specifically recognise and award those who played well within the rules, which explains why the brilliant but more physical players over the years have perhaps missed out. I would be concerned that, in the hands of anyone but the Umpires, the 'Fairest' aspect would be downgraded. For that reason alone, I'd like to see the voting system left alone, though perhaps with the other Umpires at the game being given the ability to give input as well, along the lines of the Goal Umpires being able to raise the names of players they felt had performed well from their unique perspective, thus getting the voting Field Umpires also considering players they don't see at centre bounces but still leaving the final decision to them. Better this than making it a media award or a popularity contest amongst supporters. As for the disparity towards midfield winners, I think this simply reflects the wider and further ranging role of the mid in the modern game; the distinctions we used to make between flankers, wings, small forwards and backs and midfielders have mostly disappeared; now they are all midfielders. It is inevitable, then, that more 'midfielders' will win the Trophy. I don't think the system is broken, so I vote to leave it alone.
checkside
Guest
Must be careful with changes to this umpires award and the criteria of best and fairest. Some may suggest we shouldnt bother with tradition and change the name from Brownlow considering it was an VFL award.
bryan
Guest
Please don't compare the Brownlow to Dally M. the Dally M is decided by channel 9 idiots with agendas.