Видео

Sounds about right, think he rested on flanks occasionally as well

Absolutely agree. They had more established facilities than any the Suns were able to generate in the first few years, and seem to be run a lot better as a whole. Plus they had plenty of talent - a midfield of Zorko with the poached Ablett + Rischitelli and the drafting of Swallow would have been great.

It's a valid question - for me, Priddis in 2014 failing to make the AA squad that year. Cooney before him, Woe before him. And discounting that saying being a clichéd logical fallacy, I would argue it is broken, for all the points discussed. I would also argue that the 2024 medal count exacerbates these issues with the inflated polling of Cripps and, to a lesser extent, Daicos. I'd like to hear why you think the medal isn't broken, or why the system should be preserved unchanged.

@@thegaz-man your ideas of getting all players, coaches, media commentators and fans to vote would be totally un-manageable and open to so many integrity issues. Why complicate something that works pretty well already.

@andrewsmith2591 I agree that the idea is open to some shenanigans - in hindsight, the fan vote might need to be removed or heavily modified. However, outside of that, what integrity issues would arise with this system that don’t already exist? Also, the voting procedure would be rather easy to pull off - the player, umpire and coach voting system is already in place and used right now (AFLCA, AFLPA MVPs and the Brownlow itself), and the selected media reps would be chosen before the season, and invited to submit their votes at the same time. It would be a simple matter to weight the total number of votes accordingly - if set up right, one person could tally up all votes and produce a winner in less than a day's work. American sports use similar systems on a larger scale.

@@thegaz-man even players will collude to manipulate the votes against opponents they either dislike or feel they can intimidate into underperformance the next week. The same could be said for coaches and the media. Where there's money involved there is always the risk of corruption. And how could you guarantee that every 'voter' would watch every minute of every game, which would be required for fairness. And the votes would still be open to hacking or other forms of forgery. How much money would it cost to set up right, so that one person could manage it all in a days work? Millions, I would think. The umpires vote on what they see and hear in each game and the votes are then sealed. The current system works pretty well.

Really glad to hear the series was fun for you! I can't tell you how agonising it was to have to watch that bounce, and that game, over and over whilst editing. It hurts my soul, cannot imagine how Milne feels. Gotta say, even as a man who despises Collingwood I'd have to advise against that switch if you enjoy success 😅😅 That's an interesting question - my next big series is on North and they’ve had way more success, but also had periods so bad they had to fold multiple times. I'd say North have had lower lows due to higher expectations, but St Kilda have greater overall misery as a whole. The Dogs? I dunno, they don’t interest me in the same way. They're the one Vic team I would never consider making a doco series about because I find them a bit dull - all their stories can be told in the sidebars of the stories of much more interesting clubs (which I'm doing with North and, later on, Fitzroy).

Honestly cannot believe that with how much I got wrong, I got the Grand Final bang-on 😅😅

Yes! Love new Sandwich recommendations! Caldwell's a good one, handy player in his own right. Butters is as good a player as any and if Blakey he gets to 200 games and a flag, could be a quality Sandwich.

Public sentiment was basically the only thing that kept the suits from mounting official legal battles - the fear of losing popularity among football fans by liquidating half the league prevented outright administration. Absolutely agree that there had to have been some behind the scenes 'smile and wave' style coercing from ASIC and the like to get the clubs acting above board.

Poor bloke, he's had to suffer through so much. Absolute gun though, and a great bloke from what I've read

Yeah wow it all just kinda fell apart for them hey

Yep, I've got a documentary in the works that I'm really excited for, including flying out to Melbourne for a Fitzroy match vlog. Problem is it won't be done until the end of next year or start of 2026

By a lot of metrics, compared to the teams of that year, you can make a pretty bulletproof case for 2000 Essendon Compared to other super teams from other years they're up there, Geelong and Lions beats them for mine

🤣🤣 yeah it's a shame that a proper unified national league couldn't be formed

I'll be uploading a Google Sheet after I've done my 2024 numbers, which I'll pin in the comments of my season review video in a couple weeks

Absolutely agree. Incredible triangle of results between the sides - always fun battles during those years

Fair point, absolutely understand how it eliminates some form of variance to incorporate overlapping years. My original goal was to pit dynasty teams against each other, but then you end up with (for example) a 1954-56 Melb side plus 1959 Hassa Mann added into it, a Bris side with Headland and Caracella at the same time, or a Hawks side with peak Breust and Franklin combined, all of which never happened. Those teams aren't real any more to me, which is why I made the switch to single-year teams. Made it fairer to clubs that amassed talent in the same team at the same time. The one exception is in the next experiment, where I've given 1914 Roy Park to 1910 University bc let's be honest, they need him badly.

Also, as much as I'd love to see Coleman wreck shop in these experiments, info on the other 1950s players is thin on the ground. Even accurately providing player attributes for the 70s and 80s is a bit difficult, certainly way harder than modern players.

Thanks! Feel like I really missed thr boat by not reading polling trends and failing to predict someone to get 20 million votes this season

Jeez what a disaster that was. 45 votes?!?! The hell is that?

Credit to him, he's an entertaining fella. Can't say I've been convinced my his ball knowledge compared to some others but I guess that's the point of his show haha

Wines for me was more unacceptable bc of the fact he somehow wrangled 36 votes from the umps for a season that was great but not an all-timer. At least Woe only got 24, a standard amount for the time

Damn that's pretty cool!

Yeah I did touch on him and Richo missing games very briefly. Shame he missed those, would have easily stormed in to win otherwise.

I've got a theory that some players are just more liked by umpires, or stand out more. Fev never seemed to be a friend of the men in white/green, and audiences seemed to be almost used to his bids for a 100-goal season. Buddy was new, exciting, and attention-grabbing, and sometimes being shiny gets you more votes - Sydney's Josh Kennedy to me is a classic case in point. Buddy also did a bit more work up the ground, and his inaccuracy led to him having more of the ball to get past the Fevolution, which could also be factors too.

@thegaz-man That's true Plus despite the Hawks 08 success Buddy didn't have people stealing votes except maybe Hodge and Mitchell Fev had Judd

​@thegaz-man Also hows the discord server plan going?

@Codewordthecerealkiller0 haven't really got the chance to start it yet, hoping to lay the groundwork toward the end of the year/start of next year Also apologies about not replying on Twitter, my DMs are acting a bit weird on my phone rn

Great idea! Wouldn't be able to do it for a while but certainly interested in doing a Tassie vid! I've got something planned a bit down the line for the 1997 Hobart TFL team, that might fill the gap haha

I've been sweating on that pickle juice for like a month haha

For me it's the lack of analysis involved in voting that's painful

@@thegaz-man They just arbitrary make it up after a match really quickly, and there's no merit to what the umpires think of the players.

Fair enough - the fan vote seems to be a point of contention, would probably be better suited to AA voting

Definitely see where you're coming from, this isn't the simplest thing for all fans to follow. Absolutely the umpires need some sort of access to analysis after the game to aid their vote making process!

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!!

Yeah, there'd have to be some kind of system like that - would make it easier to police votes like that if only members had access to voting, but then that limits voting to those with more money which sucks, and gives double voting power to those with more than 1 club membership

Yeah, reading the comments it seems the fan vote is almost more trouble than it's worth - maybe it could work as it's own separate thing outside of all of this?

My bad, Lockett was the only full forward to win, got my wires crossed. I believe Blight could also be classed as a forward, as could Quinlan.

Every club has a nuffie fan base. Without even knowing which club you support you’d be exhibit A for instance

@@worker-wf2em Nah, simply an observation that Crom and the Eagles really love there players, super romantic. Not sure how this observation makes me Exhibit A haha.

I would definitely attempt to lead a grassroots campaign voting for Ben Keays this year haha

That player idea is pretty interesting, gives a perspective from all parts of the ground! I've found when doing players player votes at my soccer club that each position line has a different idea of who's played better- so that's a really fun idea!

Fair enough, the fan vote can get compromised, and there are a variety of awards already. I feel that the best player not always winning though is a bit of a fundamental flaw, as that's what the Brownlow in particular is all about.

Especially the 2014 count for mine in particular

I agree, hence why their vote is weighted less than the others, although 15% might be a bit high still - hopefully that would mean that even a meme winner wouldn't come close to winning overall.

And his norm smith medal

🤣🤣🤣🤣 imagine the scenes! I guess there'd have to be some kind of control in place, maybe member-weighted voting or something?

Yeah I did realise after the fact that my system removes a lot of the drama form the count which is absolutely the best part. We'd lose so many great moments from close counts, not sure how I'd fit that into my system.

Yeah, I agree that if media types had sole control (like in a lot of overseas sports) there can be odd calls made. Umps really need to be given access to some sort of analysis afterward, 100% agree with that too. If the AFL is going to persist with an old system, at least update it with modern tech and help the umps out a bit.

The modern issue is that it's very difficult to be across all players in a 3 and now 4 umpire system. Voting patterns changed overnight when the 3 ump system was introduced in 1994. Between this and the way the game is played now, midfielers are more likely to stand out. Any system going forward must involve umpires (for the fairness aspect as much as anything) but they need assistance.

Because in reality no one rates the umpires and they're nobodies, the award has no merit when it's adjudged by nobodies who have never played or coached, why would anyone care in reality how an umpire rates them?

Absolutely fair enough, I can totally understand the fatigue with the Americanisation of our sports that's been happening recently (I mean what is the deal with wildcsrd games, honestly?) Thanks for the kind words as well!

My main concern would be Brownlow night itself - as silly as I think the voting process is, I love the drama of the 3-2-1 count

@@thegaz-man it used to be my favourite non-game event of the year, but now it drags on sooooo long, I just follow the count online.

It's hard on a Monday night, especially if you've got an early work or school run the next morning. Wish they'd bin the red carpet coverage so they could move the count forward an hour.

Honestly, a brilliant idea - the AA squad doesn't really compensate for not having an award for defenders. After all, there's technically one for forwards in the Coleman! Cripps from Daicos seems pretty accurate. What's your success rate been like for picking winners?

@@thegaz-man 8 out of 20 so far (Cousins, both of Abletts, Swan, Dangerfield, Martin, Mitchell and Neale's 2020 award). I came up with a tie in 2014 (Gray-Josh Kennedy of Sydney) and 2022 (Oliver-Neale). I've had Ablett (2007,09,13), Swan (10-11), Neale (2019-20,22) and Oliver (2021-22) win multiple times. Last year I had Daicos somehow pipping out Petracca.

The closest is the All-Australian award for best defenders.

Pretty good record tbh. Noone was picking Priddis or Cooney. Robbie Gray would have made a cool winner for sure, people seem to forget how amazing he was on his day, and IMO Judd winning over Swan in 2010 is morally grey so I'll hand you that one. Also imagine how much differently the media treat Oliver if he wins two Brownlows - would there still be dogshit articles claiming he's leaving every week? I suppose topping my VORP standings counts as my 'Brownlow pick', in which case since 2012 only Danger has won both in the same year, also winning my VORP title in 2013 and 18 as the only three timer. My winners list is a lot weirder ofc, as my algorithm doesn't weight positions like a Brownlow count would: Lance Franklin (2012), Tom Hawkins (2020), James Sicily (2022 and 23), Todd Goldstein (2015), Rory Sloane (2017), Jez McGovern (2019), NicNat (2021), and Josh Gibson (2014).

Didn't get nearly enough love bc of that awful side he was in. As an Eagles fan, I can totally understand the heartbreak of the merger...the Premierships we've gotten since might be a bit of a consolation though?

@thegaz-man Woodville may not have been successful but as a kid I loved and supported them. I'm a passionate Saints supporter too so you might notice a theme. I love an underdog 😍

Especially in high pressure games and rivalry matches, the pressure to both adjudicate and analyse must be so intense.

What are you talking about, Sam Collins was a deserving runaway winner of the best and fairest, no one could come close. Collins led the league in intercept posessions while scoring a mighty win percentage in 1v1s. Dominating season. For the rest of the team, Uwland had a really sluggish start, Sam Flanders had a few too many high-possession, low impact games, Anderson and Rowell were too inconsistent, and Ben King didn't offer enough outside of scoring goals.

I disagree on the Collins point, he's been magnificent this year and a key reason why the Suns were in finals contention at all. I agree that even with a balance of perspectives, we'd still be looking at a midfield winner most, if not all, of the time. However, I would hope that (much like the Leigh Matthews Trophy) one of the subsegment awards could go to a non-mid. And yes, while the 3-2-1 is simple, I fail to see how adding perspectives could decrease legitimacy and relevance compared to an award voted on by umpires - also, the Border Medal is literally the highest award for its sport in this country. Saying it's irrelevant is objectively incorrect.