Just over two years ago I stood in awe when the Cowboys scored on the siren to level the scores in the 2015 grand final.
Thurston then struck the upright when presented with a pressure kick from the sideline. Later, he redeemed himself by slotting a field goal from underneath the sticks to hand the Cows victory after Ben Hunt made a right old mess of the Golden Point restart.
What left me agape was something that occurred well after the match had ended.
Johnathan Thurston was handed the Clive Churchill medal.
The award had always been for the best and fairest player on the ground in the grand final – and in more than 40 years of watching grand finals I had never begrudged a single recipient of their accolade.
This time around though, it felt like a smack in the face to a rusted-on footy fan like myself.
On three previous occasions, the best player on the ground was judged to have been a player from the losing team. Canberra’s Brad Clyde in 1991 was the first player to achieve the milestone. Brad Mackay from St George followed up just two years later, while Daly Cherry-Evans from Manly was selected 20 years later in 2013.
I hadn’t just penciled in Anthony Milford in to receive the award in 2015; I had inked him in with permanent marker and three coats of clear lacquer.
Had the Cowboys been a point behind (instead of level pegging) when Thurston was lining up his kick from the sideline, the prestigious award would have been swallowed whole by Milford.
There could not have been a single justification for handing Thurston the accolade as the best player on the ground, especially from a losing side.
Thurston was not among the best ten players on the ground that day. His general kicking was ordinary. He made several errors, and his lost ball in the 33rd minute led directly to a try for Jack Reed.
Every single stat points in Milford’s favour, whether it is metres gained, offloads, tackle busts, line breaks, tackles, and missed tackles.
Milford’s snubbing by the Australian selectors for the Churchill was and still is, a complete farce. People who failed to collect, after placing a wager on him should be rightly upset.
Sportsbet or the TAB failed to refund any bets placed on the outcome like they do for other events when the results appear to be skewed, and the punters ready to revolt.
Flash forward a year and presto, the same piece of marketing magic occurs. The very same selectors decide to award the medal to the most popular player on the ground, rather than the best and fairest player on the ground.
Magically, the NRL announce that the award is decided upon at the 70-minute mark, so a few minutes prior to Andrew Fifita scoring the match winner. Last year however, when Thurston won the award the NRL claimed that it was his heroics of kicking the winning field goal that clinched him the accolade.
Well when is it that you actually make a decision. Is it at the 70-minute mark, or is it at full time?
You played well Luke Lewis but again the stats don’t lie. Andrew Fafita scored the match winning try single-handedly. He made zero errors, and did not commit a single foul.
He led every player on the paddock in metres gained and tackle busts. His defence was epic. He didn’t miss a single tackle.
So for two years running the Clive Churchill medal has been altered from being the best player on the ground, to a popularity contest. The home viewer can bathe in the warm fuzzy all-knowing feeling that the good guy does finish first every now and then, despite the old saying that he always finishes last.
There are a few things I’d like ushered in prior to the big one in 2017.
1. The Clive Churchill Medal scrapped for dishonour to his family name, and the award to be re-named the Mr Magoo Medal in honour of the selector’s poor eyesight and lack of integrity.
2. The watchdog restricting bets on future MOTM results until clear criteria and steadfast rules are implemented, and adhered to.
And there’s two more things that I’d like to see take place immediately. The NRL, and Channel Nine to stop insulting our intelligence.
The Barry
Roar Guru
The NRL has never said that those games never took place...
The Barry
Roar Guru
Sometimes you have a game where there is no standout player so you get a situation where the MOM is a matter of opinion and there's no real right or wrong. Then there's games like 2016 where you have a player that is so dominant that any other decision is just plain wrong. Fifita made the most runs, most metres, most tackle breaks. He was =1st in line break assists He was the Sharks second highest tackler and 7th overall. He was =5th in offloads. He didn't make an error, miss a tackle or concede a penalty. On top of that he scored the match winning try as a solo effort. It really was one of the most dominant grand final performances of all time and his non receipt of the medal shows the process is flawed.
Knight Vision
Guest
Have to agree with this article. Watching the game in a pub with the volume down and no influence from the commentary my friend mentioned Thurston was having a shocker and although I wouldnt go that far Thurston wasnt having a particularly great game. One lost ball led indirectly to a Broncos try in the next set of 6. The game will always need its heroes and Thurston is one of the chosen ones in the media.Although a great player he's very lucky to be playing in an era with a sever dearth of quality halves. He's also very lucky to be playing with great players at rep level which of course enhance appearances. People have very short memories Thurston is not a future immortal and to induct him into that award would only serve to diminish its prestige. Immortals should be players who have had a profound effect on how the game is played. There have been great halves of the past as good if not better than Thurston , Sterling, Mortimer, Stuart, Langer,Dalley Fittler, etc.
Alex L
Roar Rookie
If you're betting on something with no clear numerical criteria as anything other than a bit of a laugh, then I don't think your intelligence actually can be insulted.
Dean - Surry Hills
Roar Pro
No one likes to queue on New Years, or at any time for that matter - whether the queue is near or far. Wishing you all a fantastic year throughout 2017. Be Good
BigJ
Roar Guru
Excellent comment
Pomoz
Roar Rookie
1991, Royce Simmons, two tries in a Grand Final, one of which involved him storming over the top of the best prop in the game at the time, Glen Lazarus. Somehow, the winner is Bradley Clyde, part of the losing team but a darling of the media and rep selectors. Another decision decided 10 minutes before the end of the game during which Simmon's crossed for his second and ultimately match winning try. A travesty.
William Dalton Davis
Roar Rookie
He was trying to deny Thurston his fairy tail. What's fair about that? At least I assume that's his insane logic.
Grunta the original.
Guest
A great article. The NRL insult our intelligence in so many ways. Fairytale ending to keep a waning supporter base interested as we have seen in the past 2 seasons. Who will it be next? I'm guessing The Warriors, The Titans or The Eels? Also, constant betting odds being shoved down our throats when the NRL spruik that NRL is 'the family game'? Seeing a fried chicken ad every time that a ref decides that KFC haven't got their sponsorship coin during a game. Constant use of spider cam during crucial moments in a game and us fans can't see what the hell is going on? Salary cap and TPA's for Newscorp teams. Broncos and the Friday night thing? An unbalanced and biased draw.... The list goes on!
Dutski
Roar Guru
Speaking as a Roosters fan... dude, it's 3 years ago. Move on.
Aem
Guest
Yeah... I'm still going to take the guy who laid on two tries (from dummy half - no mean feat... the equivalent from a half would be close to double that) and got his forwards over the top of the Broncos (they struggled very badly in the limited time he was on the bench) over the guy who made a few line breaks without actually getting his team across the line. All pretty footwork, too little end product. Milford was a pretty distant second for mine... if he had actually broken the game open in the way Granville did then a) he probably would have won the award because b) the Broncos would have won the game. Other than those two, only the two locks stood out in any way across the teams in that game.
Birdy
Guest
2015? Your all on drugs. You've all watched the wrong game. The best player, the most influential player on the field never missed a tackle, never touched the ball, no errors but put more players through gaps, created more tries, kept players in position all game and never conceded 1 penalty. ......."ALFIE"........? Hang on, maybe thats another story?
Birdy
Guest
2015
Jacko
Guest
I dont believe the NRL actually believes we are intelligent
BigJ
Roar Guru
Fair enough but still a bit of a grey area as the grand final never officially (according to the nrl) took place
Dean - Surry Hills
Roar Pro
Now there's a half decent idea, except I don't want to invite Mason, Thurston, or Lewis
no one in particular
Roar Guru
Not saying I care or don't care about the award. If you are so desperate for it to change then why not call for the voting to change so that it consists of all the non-playing former winners. It will dilute the favoritism in voting and is still independent
Dean - Surry Hills
Roar Pro
Dean - Surry Hills
Roar Pro
Granville had a great game. He took advantage of a few quick play the balls on the back of good runs from forwards, and had a hand in two tries. His defence was great - but unfortunately he gave away a penalty in the 4th minute that led to 8 points in a row for the Broncs. The award is for best and fairest.
Aem
Guest
I'll disagree about Milford being the deserving player in 2015... because it was Jake Granville. The poor fella completely dominated the game and was snubbed for the JT circle jerk parade.