Would you say that a Brownlow Medallist is necessarily the best and fairest for the year ?

Question

Or is it the fairest, but not necessarily the best ? How would you form the criteria for this medal. ?

Answer 1

The umpires favourite player.

Answer 2

It is definately not given to the best player or Brent Harvey would have won it this year. He was best on ground in probably the last 5 games yet did not score many votes in these games. There should be an independent panel chosen each week to submit their votes on each game. I don't think it should be left to the umpires - no one can say they do not have favourites. It should be issued for the best player. I know we need to encourage fair play but if you are the best player consistently and you get wiped out for a week due to an unintentional incident - this should not impact on your reward for doing well. If a player is suspended after round 1, what incentive is there for him to play at his best?

Answer 3

Very good point Jemma.

I would have to say the Fairest.

Answer 4

Possibly the criteria for winning the medal was drawn up by Charles Brownlow, because he  probably modelled the award on someone to start with, from the good old days. All the public see is the count on the night.

Best and fairest are two completely different areas that have to be considered.

The umpire wouldn't give votes to a player who continually sabotaged the game with pettiness, nor would the umpire be likely to hand out votes to a player who held the game up and wasted time.

This would be a continual balancing act for the ump to take into consideration, and they would probably change their mind heaps of times throughout the play, according to their own value judgements on the day.

A panel wouldn't be the way to go, as they could nit pick, and not vote or give credit for the extent of difficulty, when they are sitting in the stand

Answer 5

Fairest & Best is a term that I think is a ridiculous terminology nowadays.

Last year WCE/Freo derby, Josh Carr ran around like a little thug; pushing; hitting; scragging; giving away free kicks for off the play incidents; knocking a player down off the playing area; .... he should have been reported - he was looked at by the review committee but no charges were laid.

He received top Brownlow Medal votes for that game. In my eyes - there goes the 'fairest' reference to the B/M.

Players who win the medal are ones that are constantly in the eye of the umpires - generally a midfielder. Look at the likes of Darren Glass - a full-back who always finishes near the top of the WCE's club awards but not sighted by the umps in medal voting. Most of his team-mates who outstrip him in B/M votes finish below him in club voting.

Answer 6

I'd like to see the voting done by a panel of past players. The umpires have no playing experience. They continually get conned by players staging free kicks, due to them never having been in the same position.

They also get conned by flashes of brilliance & speckie high marks. A player need only do a handfull of things, as long as they stand out, to gain votes from umpires. A panel could spend more time during the course of the game noting players achievements; not wait till the end of the game, like the umps do, & select the best players.

Some umpires may talk the matter over at half time but the ones I know certainly don't!

Who will dye their hair with peroxide this year to get the umpires attention & votes?

Answer 7

you have to be a midfielder first, a fair player second and the best player third. Needless to say the best player doesn't always get the Brownlow. I would take more notice of a medal voted by the players about who they consider to be the best (assuming they can't vote for their own team members). Jonathon Brown will never ever get a brownlow unless he redefines his role to move more around the ground and doesn't play so tough.

Answer 8

Its neither.  There are best and fairest awards, and these are generally given to the best and fairest players.  

You can't give this description to the brownlow medal because it is so unique.  It is unlike any other award, so no, it is not the best and fairest.  It is the most effective and best player for the year in the eyes of the umpires.

This may mean that the player is not always the 'fairest' etc, however thats life....