While replying to an excellent Jay Croucher article discussing Fremantle’s woes, I asked in the comments section whether Matthew Pavlich can be considered a champion player without ever having won a premiership?
It stirred a few people up with names mentioned of other ‘champion’ players who never won a flag.
While it was a stellar list of great players, my original assertion remains.
A player can’t be considered a champion without having won a championship.
Premierships, cups, flags – championships matter a lot. If you ask a player the highlight of their career, they will all give that as their answer – provided they have one.
If you ask other players their greatest regret, they will all give not winning a premiership as their answer. It is the yardstick from which all careers are judged.
Players move clubs with the hope of winning one and no career is considered complete without having attained one.
In team sports, winning the premiership of your league remains the driving force and goal of every single player.
Would Bobby Skilton give up his three Brownlow medals for a single Premiership medallion?
You bet he would. He would do it without consideration and before he could blink.
Would any decorated player with a host of individual honours do the same thing? You’re kidding yourself if you think they wouldn’t.
Names like Gary Ablett Sr, Brent Harvey, Nathan Buckley, Pavlich, Nick Riewoldt. While all immensely skilled Australian Rules players, they cannot be considered champions by any means.
This may seem hardest on Gary Ablett Snr. He had a stellar career with a host of individual awards. He played in four losing grand finals, even winning the Norm Smith in the 1989 decider. He is regularly considered in discussions as one of the greatest Australian football players in history.
Yet that last paragraph largely defines my argument. While an immensely gifted player with skills above a lot of others, he can’t be considered a champion.
If you asked him I’m sure he would tell you his career was incomplete as it didn’t produce a premiership. For all his gifts, he was unable to drag his team past the combined skill of Hawthorn, West Coast and Carlton.
Now before your fingers start blazing away in defiance, let me be very clear. It does not mean that everyone who has won a premiership is a champion player.
There are many players out there who have won a flag and are clearly not in the same league as Ablett Sr or any of those other players previously mentioned. We must use other metrics as well, including goals, games played, individual honours to round out a complete picture.
However the baseline stat, and the one that can never be removed, overlooked, glossed over or forgot about is the one thing that every player, and therefore every fan, values is the cup that says for that season your skill contributed to your team being the best.
So while Pavlich is an articulate advocate of player rights, a versatile man, respectable both on and off the field and for a long time the heart of a team, a champion he isn’t.
Not by a long shot.
Obtuseone
Guest
It's a team game so an individual can be called a champion despite not having played in a Premiership victory, particularly if he has been awarded multiple club Best & Fairests and All-Australian nominations.
13th Man
Guest
So the fact the players such as Pavlich who are not Victorian still got recognised several times further legitimises their claim to being 'champions'
13th Man
Guest
How are Fremantle's failures on Pavlich? He wasn't the Captain until the 2007 season, It was McManus and then Bell. If it was poor leadership then it certainly wasn't Pavlich's fault. He inherited a rubbish team to be frank. They had got over the high of 2006 (our previous best finish before 2013) and were now ageing and past there best and the young players weren't coming through (not unlike right now, however I think we are still in a slightly better place now mainly due to Fyfe, Walters etc). The bloke has taken a very average side to a Grand Final, a minor premiership and 4 consecutive finals series with three consecutive top 4 finishes as well as personally being one of our best finals performers and singlehandedly holding up and undermanned forward line. Far better than any other in Fremantle's short history!! I will agree our leadership in the early days was average. Drum, Connolly and Harvey were average coaches and the club wasn't well run, It was a complete basketcase and the man pretty much behind Fremantle becoming a half decent side? Matthew Pavlich. I don't know how you can say that Fremantle's failures are on Pavlich, he's done all he can and more for the club, heck he was even accurate unlike everyone else on Grand Final day!
13th Man
Guest
Jax, I think Pav is a far better player than Hodge. Pav will be known more as a champion for his individual skill as well as his loyalty and great off field person. Hodge will be known as a champion due to be being a triple premiership captain. I guess it shows that there are more ways than one to become a 'champion'
13th Man
Guest
Agree Jax, home ground is important and the only way a truly fair competition would happen would be if we went to a EPL style play everyone twice, once home, once away system. The issue of this is that we can't play 34 games in a season.
anon
Guest
He was loyal as long as he had a million a year and the carrot of the captaincy dangled in his face. Some of you talk as if he was at a basket case. Part of Fremantle's failures are on Pavlich. Fremantle should have been playing finals 2003-07 every season. They had poor leadership at the time.
jax
Guest
Agreed Rick.. Out of interest if Pav had captained Freo to 2-3 flags and for arguements sake won a Norm Smith would that qualify him for Legend Status IYO? A good comparison might be Hodge.
jax
Guest
Only one of us is biased Dean and it's not me. I'm not making excuses either, I'm adding context. You refuse to acknowledge that the ground has anything to do with the result, that's ludicrous. To me it's pretty clear that WC is good enough to beat the Hawks at Subi and that the Hawks are good enough to beat WC at the MCG. That tells me that the teams are pretty evenly matched on their day with the Hawks taking the points as they have been up there for so long and have the track record. R19 was an excellent result considering you'd played in the past 3 GF's and we were the FTB's that wouldn't make the eight. Settle pettle, your Hawks are the benchmark, I'm not disputing that. We're the new kids on the block but it's important to put all of the facts down on the table instead of making sweeping statements that are designed to paint your club only in the most positive of lights. The GF is played on your home ground, no matter where you finish on the ladder. That's an advantage whether you want to admit to it or not. There are people out there that will not stay quiet until the competition becomes national and stops favouring Victorian clubs, get used to it. You said - "West Coast lost to the Hawks because they are not as good and therefore not the champion team." I'll now say - "last time they played at Subi the Hawks lost to WC because they are not as good and therefore not the champion team they think they are away from home" Can you see how biased your comments are? You pick the day and ground to arrive at your conclusion and that's fine with me but don't get upset if someone's else chooses a different day and ground. Only one of us has a balanced position and it's not you. The GF is always played on your home ground, even the Cats 'home game' is played on your home ground, lucky for you. Just be happy that AFL House is looking after you and has your back.
Dean
Guest
My analysis is not shallow, your just overly bias and constantly making excuses for your team. In the past four meetings the 2 teams have crossed paths 4 times between Rnd 19 last year and Rnd 2 this season with an even split of 2 games on each other's ground. Hawks have won 3/4. Winning by 14 and then losing by 34 odd points at Subiaco and at home winning both times by 46 points. You make excuses about having a couple players out in round 19 last year. Hawthorn had more key players out 2 weeks ago and still dominated. Hawks have simply been better and you need to get over it and stop blaming where the game is played. You start to come across as a bit of a Don freo with your excuses
Jamie Radford
Roar Pro
Couldn't disagree more with this article. A definition of a champion is 'a person who has surpassed all rivals in a sporting contest or other competition.' Stress the 'a person', or if you like an individual. Being part of a premiership is often luck of the draw, being a champion player is not. It is about excelling at your chosen sport over a long period of time and has absolutely zero to do with team success.
Don Freo
Guest
Sumich, Longmire...What an era!
EddyJ
Guest
Tony Lockett would definitely struggle to get a game these days, considering he turned 50 just last month. I don't think he's on any AFL lists at the moment, so that might also be a problem, as well as probably not trained for about 14 years. BTW, if Lockett is number three of his generation, who would be the other two above him? Dunstall? Ablett? It's hard to pick – I'd say Dunstall and Lockett were very similar players, but Ablett seemed to have more agility and around the ground skills.
13th Man
Guest
So by your logic Spangher is a champion but Skilton is not? Ridiculous, he won the brownlow three bloody times for being the champion player out of everyone in the comp. Of course he's a champion, he just wasn't in a champion team! Same goes for Pav, wasn't in a champion team but as an individual he certainly is a champion player of his era (though not quite at the level of Skilton and Abblett snr, who I consider legends, which is probably the step up from champions.....but that's another matter).
13th Man
Guest
As a long suffering Dockers fan I know that the easy decision for him would have been to walk out. He was at a crap club that was managed poorly and had no success. Sure he eventually got paid a million bucks a year but he could have got more plus the opportunity to play in more finals and possibly a premiership, but the bloke stayed loyal to his club. That makes him more of a champion not less!
Dean. R
Guest
Mwm, and John. Whilst you both make good points, I believe you have both Contradicted yourselves in your own argument, and opinion. If we are to use your meaning of the word; Champion, which is smeone who has beaten all other rivals and competitors in a competition, then you would most certainly have to classify Pavlich as such. The reason is this; 6 All Australian awards where he beat all rivals in the competition to earn those coveted positions. The 2015 Mclelland Trophy which is awarded to the team who has beaten all other teams in the home and away competition. If we weren't to use your contradicted arguments, and we used another textbook meaning which defines a champion as " one who is clearly superior or has the attributes of a winner". This again proves your assessment moot, as Pavlich was clearly superior, and possessed all the attributes of a winner.
jax
Guest
Didn't know that Matty but I'm not suprised. Thanks for that one.
jax
Guest
Hawks lost at Subi to WC, home ground is very important obviously. WC led them all night in R19 as well minus Nic and Sinclair. Your analysis is very shallow. Agree that they would need to play each other once or twice for it to be fair. If once then it should be one year at home and one year away.
Dean
Guest
Regarding the minor premiership as the pinnicle could only be relevant if the competition were even. All teams would have to meet on 2 occasions, 1 home 1 away. West Coast lost to the Hawks because they are not as good and therefore not the champion team.
mattyb
Guest
Samantha sure loves the dictionary. Samantha,the dictionary isn't set in stone like the bible,people make up words and the dictionary reports it,you seem to think it's the other way around.
Floyd Calhoun
Guest
Spot on your Holiness. The word 'champion' comes from the French. Champs = field. A champion is the best on the field. It's an individual honour. Or, at least, it used to be. Your team might lose, but you were still adjudged the best out there. It's not a difficult concept to grasp.