2011 Brownlow Thread

[bornadog]

Swan biggest threat to Judd's Brownlow (http://www.sportsnewsfirst.com.au/articles/2011/09/22/swan-biggest-threat-to-judd-s-brownlow/)

CARLTON superstar Chris Judd confronts a daring three-pronged assault before he takes a historic third Brownlow Medal next Monday.

Sensational Collingwood on-ball duo Dane Swan and Scott Pendlebury, as well as Judd’s gifted young teammate Marc Murphy are all poised to make a genuine tilt at winning their first medal after sensational 2011 seasons.

Judd, 28, is clear favourite to add a third medal to last year’s run-away victory as well as his 2004 award and his 2011 season performances stack up on another win for the ball-winning and clearances sensation.

But top online bookmakers sportsbet.com.au might have been a little hasty to pay out more than $300,000 on Carlton’s gun on-baller after Round 20 in early August.

Since Judd’s payout, punters have heavily backed Sydney champion and another dual winner Adam Goodes with his stunning run home and a distinct prospect of four or five best-on-ground efforts over his last six outings.

Goodes, 31, was awesome in a late Swans surge of three straight wins in Rounds 22 to 24 and was instrumental in a vital victory over the Western Bulldogs in Round 18 before a bye the next week.

But it all seems a little late for the incomparable Goodes does not seem to have had sufficiently good enough start to have vital early votes to be within reach of Judd, Swan, Pendlebury and Murphy late into the count.

The only other possible challenge could come from constantly big possession-winning Bulldogs first-year captain Matthew Boyd, who will poll highly despite his side’s poor season overall and Hawthorn ball-magnet Sam Mitchell, who is ineligible.

It all points to Judd and three prime contenders.

Judd has probably had an even more sensational 2011 than he did last year when the mercurial Blue won the medal with 30 votes polled from 12 games.

The Blues superstar polled eight best-on-ground votes last year, including a first ever five consecutive threes in his delayed start to the season on the back of serving a three-game suspension hanging over from the 2009 elimination final in Brisbane.

Judd has had nine games this season with 30 or more possessions and booted 14 goals, as opposed to last season’s win when he only needed six outings with over 30-plus touches to take his precious medal home.

What the amazing Judd does with the football as he surges from congestion with a swivel of his hips and explosive pace adds significantly to his appeal with AFL umpires who award the vital votes.

Ironically, he could suffer from a slight guilt complex among the whistle blowers who hand out votes, as Swan was probably harshly handled last season.

He was clear favourite to win last year’s highest player’s honour and got eight second vote rankings among his 24 votes, to finish third behind Judd and then 2009 winner Gary Ablett.

Swan, 27, has maintained a staggering consistency through 2011 to remarkably be in an almost identical position to rival Judd for the game’s most prestigious personal honour heading into this season’s count.

The dashing Pies on-baller has had another 15 games from his 21 outings in 2011 with 30 or more possessions, the same as last year from Swan’s 22 matches.

Swan was especially productive on the back of his highly publicised mid-season sabbatical to Arizona when the Pies magician had 10 straight 30-plus efforts and stormed back into medal winning calculations.

Swan also booted 30 goals among his stunning sequence of performances that makes him clearly Judd’s most glaring rival to take the 2011 Brownlow.

Equally, it’s teammates that also loom as the big challengers to Judd taking and third Brownlow and Swan his first.

Pendlebury and Murphy would be more than worthy winners this year.

They have each had 30 or more possessions in 12 of their 22 home-and-away games.

Pendlebury, 23 and Murphy, 24, will poll consistently and should collect votes in as many as 12 or even up to 14 games to finish with tallies in the high 20’s.

Judd’s chances of winning his third award probably hinge on whether umpires offer the stoppages genius another succession of vital three votes or whether he gets the two’s and singles when Murphy is awarded the match top rankings.

Swan should start explosively with around three or four top vote collects in the opening month and also storm home with a sequence of three’s and two’s over the last six to eight weeks.

The ball-winning marvel with insatiable running powers should also poll in around a dozen games with his winning prospects lingering on whether Swan gets top votes often enough when he and Pendlebury have been equally outstanding in the same outings.

Kim HAGDORN’S estimated Brownlow finish for 2011.

Dane SWAN (Collingwood) 31 votes
Scott PENDLEBURY (Collingwood) 27 votes
Matthew BOYD (Bulldogs) 27 votes
Sam MITCHELL (Hawthorn) 25 votes
Chris JUDD (Carlton) 24 votes
Marc MURPHY (Carlton) 23 votes
Brent MOLONEY (Melbourne) 17 votes
Scott THOMPSON (Adelaide) 17 votes
Gary ABLETT (Gold Coast) 16 votes
James KELLY (Geelong) 16 votes

[bornadog]

I think Boyd will poll the best from the Doggies although Griffen and Murphy should also get votes. Griffen has not polled well in the brownlow over the years.

Overall I hope Judd doesn't win, can't stand the bloke.

[1eyedog]

Mitchell for mine, which would be a shame considering he is ineligible. Swan is an inconsistent poller and he and Pendlebury may just cut each others lunch, same with Judd and Murphy. Hawthorn have won enough games and Mitchell has been sensational with few mids taking votes off him.

[The Underdog]

I'll be supporting ABJ - "Anyone But Judd"

[Daughter of the West]

I'll be supporting ABJ - "Anyone But Judd"

I'm jumping on that bandwagon!

There is a colleague in the next corral of desks over from me who is a loud, LOUD, LOUD Carlton supporter (but they've been amazingly quiet this week, tee hee! :D) who would not shut up if Judd won the Brownlow. I'm hoping for another week of peace!

[OLD SCRAGGer]

I'LL GO FOR:

ADAM GOODES
MATT BOYD
MARK MURPHY

3 way tie ;)

[Maddog37]

I'm jumping on that bandwagon!

There is a colleague in the next corral of desks over from me who is a loud, LOUD, LOUD Carlton supporter (but they've been amazingly quiet this week, tee hee! :D) who would not shut up if Judd won the Brownlow. I'm hoping for another week of peace!

Just saunter over and comment how good the all Australian side looks and see what reponse you get:D

[bornadog]

I'LL GO FOR:

ADAM GOODES
MATT BOYD
MARK MURPHY

3 way tie ;)

Goodes has had a very good year and wouldn't be surprised if he gets up.

[Maddog37]

Eagles have won quite a few games but noone from there is really being talked up. Any chance Priddis will sneak a few?

[Greystache]

I'll be supporting ABJ - "Anyone But Judd"

+1

Cannot stand him, or the rediculously over the top attention he gets. Has there ever been more attention given to an inside mid, with average pace, poor disposal, and no ability to kick goals?

The way he is lauded now as "the clearance king" in the absence of any other elite attribute makes me want to vomit, he didn't even lead the league in the category FFS!

[The Underdog]

+1

Cannot stand him, or the rediculously over the top attention he gets. Has there ever been more attention given to an inside mid, with average pace, poor disposal, and no ability to kick goals?

The way he is lauded now as "the clearance king" in the absence of any other elite attribute makes me want to vomit, he didn't even lead the league in the category FFS!

I'm just not sure why he's such an out and out favourite for the medal. He's in no way been the clear best player in the league (not that that usually matters with the Brownlow). He's getting by on reputation and the adoration of the Carlton fans. Not saying he's not a good player just not that much better than quite a few others. All things being equal, Ablett was easily better than Judd this year, but won't get votes because his team got slaughtered most weeks.

[bornadog]

+1

Cannot stand him, or the rediculously over the top attention he gets. Has there ever been more attention given to an inside mid, with average pace, poor disposal, and no ability to kick goals?

The way he is lauded now as "the clearance king" in the absence of any other elite attribute makes me want to vomit, he didn't even lead the league in the category FFS!


I'm just not sure why he's such an out and out favourite for the medal. He's in no way been the clear best player in the league (not that that usually matters with the Brownlow). He's getting by on reputation and the adoration of the Carlton fans. Not saying he's not a good player just not that much better than quite a few others. All things being equal, Ablett was easily better than Judd this year, but won't get votes because his team got slaughtered most weeks.

A media darling.

[LostDoggy]

Gablett may well sneak it you know. The umps will be giving him votes anyway even in a losing side (they can't help noticing him based simply on reputation and will cut him some slack for being in GC), and no one else in GC is going to take votes off him.

I'm guessing he'll poll at LEAST 15 votes.

[LostDoggy]

Eagles have won quite a few games but noone from there is really being talked up. Any chance Priddis will sneak a few?

I like your thinking.

[bulldogsman]

Scott Pendlebury for mine.

I honestly thought Murphy had a better season then Judd, but what would I know.

[Topdog]

I hope and pray that Kim Hagdorn isn't betting on the Brownlow.

Judd will win, Pendles or Goodes 2nd.

[Scraggers]

Eagles have won quite a few games but noone from there is really being talked up. Any chance Priddis will sneak a few?

I think there will be too many vote takers at the Eagles ... Cox ... Naitanui ... Embley ... Kennedy (against us) etc. So no, I don't think they are a chance to take Charlie.

For me, I think Judd to beat Goodes and Pendlebury

[mjp]

Would love Goodes to become a triple medallist.

[LostDoggy]

I'll be supporting ABJ - "Anyone But Judd"

I'll jump on that wagon too!

[LostDoggy]

I'll go with Goodes. All class.

[1eyedog]

Judd better poll heavy early, he had a shocker last month of the home and away. Murphy will take too many from him IMO.

[Ozza]

Backed Goodes when he was a fair way out in the market - and then laid off this weekend.....so I have a free ride around on Goodes for $450.....hoping he can become a Triple Brownlow Medalist!

[DragzLS1]

Backed Goodes when he was a fair way out in the market - and then laid off this weekend.....so I have a free ride around on Goodes for $450.....hoping he can become a Triple Brownlow Medalist!

I have done the same ;)

[Hotdog60]

I think Boyd might be a surprise, He's only danger of votes will be from Murphy and the fact that we didn't win to many games. But he does rack up a lot of possessions and he is always around the umps.

[Topdog]

I think Boyd might be a surprise, He's only danger of votes will be from Murphy and the fact that we didn't win to many games. But he does rack up a lot of possessions and he is always around the umps.

Rob Murphy??? No, Griffen will be our 2nd best by quite some margin.

[Hotdog60]

Rob Murphy??? No, Griffen will be our 2nd best by quite some margin.

I thought Murphy had a standout season and was consistent through out, Griffen faded off near the end.

[The Coon Dog]

I always look forward to the Power Point show the following day, very funny usually.

[w3design]

I always look forward to the Power Point show the following day, very funny usually.

:)Agree. And even odds that there will be at least one photo of Rebecca "Michael Jackson" Twigley:eek:

[Topdog]

I thought Murphy had a standout season and was consistent through out, Griffen faded off near the end.

Murphy won't get 10 votes though, Griff will be close to 15

[Flamethrower]

1. Sam Mitchell 27 votes
=2. Marc Murphy 25 votes
=2. Dean Cox 25 votes

Worth a place bet: Daniel Wells, Dale Thomas, James Kelly

[Topdog]

Think you have massively over polled Cox.

Also where are Judd and Goodes?

[LostDoggy]

Very surprised how many BOGs Ablett is getting. I thought he'd get a few 1s and 2s but not 3s.

[cinder]

Could have another Chris Grant scenario

[westdog54]

Feeling a little bit sick just thinking about it. Would hate to see Mitchell top the count.

[1eyedog]

Feeling a little bit sick just thinking about it. Would hate to see Mitchell top the count.

x2 if there is a guy from an opposing club I don't mind it's Mitchell.

Swan looks home for now.

[cinder]

Swan ... Groan! Hope Eddie can contain himself

[BulldogBelle]

Round 24
WB vs Fremantle

C.Ward - 1 Vote - WFF?

1 Vote for playing?

[LostDoggy]

All I care about is the fact that Boyd finished ahead of Judd.

And my god, Swans gf is beyond irritating.

[cinder]

Round 24
WB vs Fremantle

C.Ward - 1 Vote - WFF?

1 Vote for playing?

I thought the same thing, bit of a joke

[AndrewP6]

All I care about is the fact that Boyd finished ahead of Judd.

And my god, Swans gf is beyond irritating.

I think she's the only good thing about the whole night.

[KT31]

Well done Matty Boyd.
Great effort in such a debacle of a season.

[Remi Moses]

I think she's the only good thing about the whole night.

Blimey he was getting tagged heavily!
She was loving the limelight, looked like a younger version of Nicky Buckley.
How the Hell didWard get a vote in R24?

[bornadog]

Well done Matty Boyd.
Great effort in such a debacle of a season.

Terrific to finish equal third, well done.

[AndrewP6]

Blimey he was getting tagged heavily!
She was loving the limelight, looked like a younger version of Nicky Buckley.
How the Hell didWard get a vote in R24?

She's too good for that Filth Flog.

On Ward, well, maybe the ump was from West Sydney?

[Sedat]

Round 24
WB vs Fremantle

C.Ward - 1 Vote - WFF?

1 Vote for playing?
Quite possibly the worst votes ever awarded in a match. The other one that had me falling off my chair was Gary Ablett getting 2 votes against the Dogs up on the Gold Coast when Liam Picken kept him down to low 20's possessions and beat him all ends up. Boydy missing out on votes against Freo in Perth was plain stupidity - he was absolutely outstanding that night and despite us losing he was the clear BOG that night. Marc Murphy getting BOG against us was also somewhat eyebrow-raising - had a good game but not that good.

[soupman]

Missed the count but went on Facebook and in the comments section for the Bulldogs page which announced the result were people whingeing about how the comment spoiled the resulyt for them.

FFS how have people not figured out that if you are watching something millions of others will watch, and it is competetive with a winner at the end, then if you are watching it on delay avoid twitter and facebook. God people are daft.

[Remi Moses]

She's too good for that Filth Flog.

On Ward, well, maybe the ump was from West Sydney?

Ward spent two hours on the Spencer st wing thinking of his inflated wallet!
Nice refreshing article on Chris Dawes in the Hun, basically saying "I'm not going to leave for money". "I'm not that sort of person " Refreshing to hear.

[LostDoggy]

Didn't watch the count and I can't believe that Ward got votes against Fremantle Rnd 24!!! What universe did the umps watch the game from, because where I was sitting at Doglands, Ward made sure he was "far, far away" from too much action. What did others call it - "bruise free footy".

[LostDoggy]

Ward spent two hours on the Spencer st wing thinking of his inflated wallet!
Nice refreshing article on Chris Dawes in the Hun, basically saying "I'm not going to leave for money". "I'm not that sort of person " Refreshing to hear.

Don't believe everything you read on Dawes. The money line is bs

[Desipura]

Don't believe everything you read on Dawes. The money line is bs

Tell us more......

[1eyedog]

I don't buy it either.

[LostDoggy]

Tell us more......

You beleive its all above board then you're dreaming.

[Desipura]

You beleive its all above board then you're dreaming.
Did I say anything? I asked you to tell us more as I assumed you knew more.

[LostDoggy]

I've met Bonnie Swan.

Could it be 4th, 3rd or 2nd?
Should Swan have been eligible after the betting scandal was exposed?

[Topdog]

which betting scandal was Swan involved in? (serious q)

[comrade]

Has the post-Brownlow night email come out yet?

[always right]

I hope and pray that Kim Hagdorn isn't betting on the Brownlow. Judd will win, Pendles or Goodes 2nd.

If he/she did have a bet, he/she would have cleaned up.


Rob Murphy??? No, Griffen will be our 2nd best by quite some margin.

Going by the above quotes, you're not the greatest judge of the brownlow are you?:)

[Daughter of the West]

Has the post-Brownlow night email come out yet?

Haven't seen it as yet. Been asked for it by three different people though.

Usually comes out about lunch time, doesn't it? I'm hoping it's of the calibre of the Warney/Capper effort a few years ago, that was hilarious!

[LostDoggy]

which betting scandal was Swan involved in? (serious q)
When Shaw got done. Swan passed on info to a family member and got a reprimand I believe. Not saying he should be inelligible just questioning it

[The Coon Dog]

When Shaw got done. Swan passed on info to a family member and got a reprimand I believe. Not saying he should be inelligible just questioning it

Wasn't that Maxwell?

[Desipura]

Wasn't that Maxwell?

Sure was.

[bornadog]

Brownlow voting – club-by-club


Adelaide
1 Scott Thompson 12
2 Nathan van Berlo 9
3 Patrick Dangerfield 7

Brisbane
1 Tom Rockliff 9
2 Simon Black 9
3 Daniel Merrett 6

Carlton
1 Chris Judd 23
2 Marc Murphy 19
3 Bryce Gibbs 12

Collingwood
1 Dane Swan 34
2 Scott Pendlebury 24
3 Travis Cloke 13

Essendon
1 Jobe Watson 15
2 Brent Stanton * 6
3 Michael Hurley 6

Fremantle
1 Nathan Fyfe 13
2 Matthew Pavlich 9
3 Aaron Sandilands 5

Geelong
1 Joel Selwood * 17
2 Steve Johnson 12
3 Joel Corey * 11

Gold Coast
1 Gary Ablett 23
2 Jared Brennan 3
3 Nathan Bock * 3

Hawthorn
1 Sam Mitchell * 30
2 Lance Franklin * 20
3 Luke Hodge 17

Melbourne
1 Brent Moloney * 19
2 Colin Sylvia * 10
3 Jordie McKenzie 6

North Melbourne
1 Andrew Swallow 16
2 Drew Petrie 11
3 Brent Harvey 8

Port Adelaide
1 Robbie Gray 6
2 Travis Boak 4
3 David Rodan 3

Richmond
1 Trent Cotchin 15
2 Dustin Martin 12
3 Nathan Foley 6

St Kilda
1 Nick Dal Santo 28
2 Leigh Montagna * 10
3 Brendon Goddard 9

Sydney
1 Adam Goodes 19
2 Ryan O'Keefe * 12
3 Jude Bolton 10

West Coast
1 Matt Priddis 19
2 Dean Cox 18
3 Luke Shuey 12

Western Bulldogs
1 Matthew Boyd 24
2 Ryan Griffen 7
3 Callan Ward 6

[Topdog]

If he/she did have a bet, he/she would have cleaned up.



Going by the above quotes, you're not the greatest judge of the brownlow are you?:)

I copped my fair whack from punting against Swan and I'll admit to being super wrong about that one. I outlayed $2500 this year on the Brownlow and got a return of $2350 so it's been a wasted year. Only $50 of that was on Swan @ $11.00.

Griff not getting at least 10 is ridiculous but he did come 2nd in our count so not sure why you would use that to criticise me.

[LostDoggy]

Wasn't that Maxwell?

Excuse me, I was mistaken. I can't tell one filth member from the next.

[Maddog37]

Excuse me, I was mistaken. I can't tell one filth member from the next.

Is that called Filthism?

[LostDoggy]

3 Daniel Merrett 6

Hawthorn
1 Sam Mitchell * 30
2 Lance Franklin * 20
3 Luke Hodge 17



Like him or hate him my highlight of this years brownlow was seeing someone who is not a midfield player get into the twenties!

[w3design]

Quite possibly the worst votes ever awarded in a match. The other one that had me falling off my chair was Gary Ablett getting 2 votes against the Dogs up on the Gold Coast when Liam Picken kept him down to low 20's possessions and beat him all ends up. Boydy missing out on votes against Freo in Perth was plain stupidity - he was absolutely outstanding that night and despite us losing he was the clear BOG that night. Marc Murphy getting BOG against us was also somewhat eyebrow-raising - had a good game but not that good.

Almost fell off my chair when these votes were read. Had Boydy down for a guaranteed 3 this round. I thought we time warped back to a time when everyone was playing under 11's and players were getting votes for getting their first ever kick.

I think the below says it all:

Round 5 v Fremantle
3 - Kepler Bradley
2 - Robert Murphy
1 - David Mundy

Player Name K H D M HO T FF FA G B
Matthew Boyd 28 17 45 5 1 7 3 1 0 0
Kepler Bradley 12 4 16 7 4 0 1 0 4 1
Robert Murphy 15 5 20 2 0 0 1 0 0 0
David Mundy 15 14 29 4 1 7 0 2 2 0

Enough said....:mad:

[Topdog]

The amazing part is he got 7 free kicks so was obviously in the umps mind all game.

[westdog54]

Round 5 v Fremantle
3 - Kepler Bradley
2 - Robert Murphy
1 - David Mundy

Player Name K H D M HO T FF FA G B
Matthew Boyd 28 17 45 5 1 7 3 1 0 0
Kepler Bradley 12 4 16 7 4 0 1 0 4 1
Robert Murphy 15 5 20 2 0 0 1 0 0 0
David Mundy 15 14 29 4 1 7 0 2 2 0

Enough said....:mad:
Bradley FFS????:confused:

The mind boggles.

[Happy Days]

Bradley FFS????:confused:

The mind boggles.

Bradley did torch Lake that night, but 3 votes is outrageous.

Boyd was so far in front of everyone else that night. I'm so sick of the thought that a player's team needs to have won for them to have been any good.

[Mantis]

Boyd was so far in front of everyone else that night. I'm so sick of the thought that a player's team needs to have won for them to have been any good.

How can this be the case when Murf got the 2 votes in said game?

[Happy Days]

How can this be the case when Murf got the 2 votes in said game?

Do you seriously not think that preference is given to the winning team, or are you just trying to be argumentative? Boyd was clearly the best player and got nothing.

Ask Chris Grant/James Hird if it's the case.

[Mantis]

Do you seriously not think that preference is given to the winning team, or are you just trying to be argumentative? Boyd was clearly the best player and got nothing.

Ask Chris Grant/James Hird if it's the case.

Cool the jets.

You stated 'I'm so sick of the thought that a player's team needs to have won for them to have been any good.'

I replied that Murphy was deemed to be good in that game and received 2 votes.

The whole notion that the winning team gets preference in terms of votes is a different arguement and one which you didn't really raise with your initial comment.

[Topdog]

Even that is slowly changing. Heck Ablett got 23 votes this year.

[LostDoggy]

Even that is slowly changing. Heck Ablett got 23 votes this year.

Is that evidence of change, or simply evidence of umps being star-conscious? Dane Swan was a middling poll-getter when he wasn't considered a star, he played better last year than this yet polled less, now that he's an established 'gun' umps seem happier to give him the votes.

Ditto Ward's votes in Rd 24. He did nothing, but had been in the news all week so the umps noticed him more than anyone else.

The Brownlow is not so much a measure of the best player as it is a measure of what umps notice in a game, and evidence of star-struckness as much as anything (another symptom of which is how much they love using a star's first name over and over during a game, to show how chummy they are).

[bornadog]

The best player is a measure of what supporters, posters, media and umpires etc notice in a game, and evidence of star-struckness as much as anything ).

Edited for accuracy:D

[anfo27]

I was lucky enough to have something on Swan simply because of the amount of footy he was getting. The umpires now get to see the stats before they give their votes. I think last year was the first year it happened and with Swan getting so much ball last year with very little votes in return it created a lot of talk back madness on radio. The amount of idiots that would ring in quoting the amount of touches Swan got without getting a vote was never ending. So i'm sure the umpires have made a conscious effort now to give votes to the players who rack em up.
In past years you would have young players who star in a game but because the umpires don't really know who they are they would miss out on votes. A Fyfe comes to mind as an example but now the umpies would look at the stats and see Fyfe has had 30 possies and 2-3 goals so he should get 3.
I don't like the way the umpires do the votes these days but with the amount of criticism they get from the media and the fans I don't really blame them.
In the future i will be looking at the stats to give me the best indication on where my money is going.

[jazzadogs]

I was lucky enough to have something on Swan simply because of the amount of footy he was getting. The umpires now get to see the stats before they give their votes. I think last year was the first year it happened and with Swan getting so much ball last year with very little votes in return it created a lot of talk back madness on radio. The amount of idiots that would ring in quoting the amount of touches Swan got without getting a vote was never ending. So i'm sure the umpires have made a conscious effort now to give votes to the players who rach em up.
In past years you would have young players who star in a game but because the umpires don't really know who they are they would miss out on votes. A Fyfe comes to mind as an example but now the umpies would look at the stats and see Fyfe has had 30 possies and 2-3 goals so he should get 3.
I don't like the way the umpires do the votes these days but with the amount of criticism they get from the media and the fans I don't really blame them.
In the future i will be looking at the stats to give me the best indication on where my money is going.
Surely they don't see the stats? That would be ridiculous.

[anfo27]

Surely they don't see the stats? That would be ridiculous.

I'm 95% sure they do. If you look at the top 10 vote getters jazz how many of them are rack em up midfielders?

[jazzadogs]

I'm 95% sure they do. If you look at the top 10 vote getters jazz how many of them are rack em up midfielders?
But that's been the case for years.

Surely there would have been much more media outcry if they'd decided after 80 years of voting to let the umpires see the stats post-match!?!

[Topdog]

Is that evidence of change, or simply evidence of umps being star-conscious? Dane Swan was a middling poll-getter when he wasn't considered a star, he played better last year than this yet polled less, now that he's an established 'gun' umps seem happier to give him the votes.

Ditto Ward's votes in Rd 24. He did nothing, but had been in the news all week so the umps noticed him more than anyone else.

The Brownlow is not so much a measure of the best player as it is a measure of what umps notice in a game, and evidence of star-struckness as much as anything (another symptom of which is how much they love using a star's first name over and over during a game, to show how chummy they are).

No it is showing it is changing. There were numerous examples of it this year and not always the "star" player.

As for using first name it is one of the first things told to officials, nothing to do with being star struck.