Interesting to see Mike Sheehan today write that Judd is the umpires pet. Might be true, but then he also shows some stats and when you factor in Judd played 3 less games in the H&A series, you have the following stats...

AVERAGES

Disposals ... Swan 31.9, Judd 26.8, so Swan easily ahead in terms of pure touches
Goals ... Swan 0.82 (spread over 22 rounds is 18.0 gls), Judd 0.74 (spread over 22 rounds is 16.3 gls), so Swan ahead but the difference is negligible (about 10 pts total for the year)
Efficiency ... Swan 71.6%, Judd 69.1%, so Swan ahead but difference (2.5%) is not massively significant

OK, so Swan gets more of the ball, that is unquestionable, and he kicks more goals and has better efficiency, but in both cases the differences are, let's face it, minimal.

Now, let's look at some other stats...

Clearances ... Judd 6.4, Swan 5.3 (that's 24 more clearances a year to Judd)
Inside 50s ... Judd 5.3, Swan 4.9 (that's 9 more Inside 50s a year to Judd)
Tackles ... Judd 5.3, Swan 4.5 (that's 17.6 more tackles a year to Judd)
Score Assists ... Judd 1.3, Swan 1.1 (that's 4.4 more score assists a year to Judd)

Interesting reading I'm sure you'd all agree.

The Score Assist measure you could argue evens up the Goals measure.

With that in mind, basically, we have the following...

- Swan has 4.3 more 'effective' touches a game
- in all likelihood both have similar contribution to the scoreboard
- Judd has 24 more clearances a year
- Judd has 9 more Inside 50s a year
- Judd has 17.6 more tackles a year

_________________
It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to paint it

Judd has TWO MORE brownlows than Swan.

_________________
This might sound extreme in the context of alleged sexual assault, drunken violence and a drug trafficking charge...

And two less sleeve-tatts

_________________
WADA medical director Dr Alan Vernec describes Essendon* FC drug case as biggest scandal in team sport the world of sport has seen. #WC2WB

#GUILTY

And a LOT more brain cells......

_________________
Don't look at me, I'm irrelevant....

VB you forgot the girlfriend stats

[quote="Virgin Blue"]Interesting to see Mike Sheehan today write that Judd is the umpires pet.

quote]


Who gives a flying flower what Mike Sheehan thinks?? The spanker just can't admit he was wrong..... Judd's a bad kick.... pfffffffffftt..... flower Mike Sheehan and " his opinions"

Very funny

_________________
If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you!

Stats
I saw the stats and they point to roughly even.
(you can't really say Judd has 'only' 4 less possies per game but 9 more inside 50s per year... like for like = 88 less possies per year... but, that aside....)

One reason Judd's disposal effectiveness is less is b/c he has more hardball gets under more pressure to dispose and usually has 2 guys hanging off him when he might handball to advantage which our boys haven't yet fully cottoned on to so miss the advantage anyway. Whereas, Swan gets more of his possessions in the clear and gets to dispose of the ball under less pressure.

Swan undoubtedly had a better year but I'm pretty sure he wasn't even his own team's most concerning player from opposition coaches. I reckon Pendlebury would draw more concern for coaches. And Ablett more so than Pendlebury. And Judd on a par with Ablett.

Umpires Pets
As far as umpires pets go, perhaps it also has something to do with umpires factoring in the degree of difficulty as they witness the efforts made against these ball players are (what do Judd, Selwood, Bartel, Hayes, Watson, Pendlebury have in common??)
Compared with the media who put a lot more weight on the stats they are reading live to help them determine the best players. (Dermie is an exception - he likes to pick his best players based on those that most influenced the course of the match.)

Teammates' Votes
Whilst a reasonable argument, it is somewhat countered by the flip side: the better teams win more matches, giving greater opportunity for at least 2 of the 3 votes per match (most likely the 3- and 2- votes). So, whilst Judd had less competition within his own club, he had more competition from opposition clubs. ie. the lack of intra-club competition is counterbalanced by the greater interclub competition.

Midfielder's Award
Well of course it is. That's where the best players usually play! OWAAT put up a chart showing the votes of the AA backmen. Ridiculous. The key forwards are the only potential competition but are usually most valuable b/c of their scarcity rather than their brilliance, freaks aside (Reiwoldt, Brown, Carey, Lockett...) Fev could kick 9 goals by taking 12 marks and having 10 kicks - does that make him a better player than Judd or Ablett? Important, yes. Better? Well, he'd have to do it every week. (btw, with a full season, I reckon Reiwoldt could win it...)

And finally....
Line them (Swan, Judd) up on the wall - who would you pick first?

In 1995 Mike Sheahan picked us to miss the 8. Too old and too slow.

_________________
"We used to sit around and talk about how bad the game plan was." Anthony Koutoufides

Is that backs to the wall or chests to the wall.......NTTAWWT
So who would you prick first?

_________________
If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you!

Judd also carries an entire team on his back and week in and week out is the reason why his team come back into the contest.

Swan plays for the best team and doesn't have to worry about a thing.

_________________
Koperek.

Absolutely no doubt that Judd is asked to do far more for his team than Swan is.

Just like Pavlich had to practically carry Freo over the line before they got a more even spread of contributors. Swan is nothing more than a very efficient part of a very efficient machine.

Plus whereas Judd is intelligent, lucid, well-rounded and saves his aggression for gameday, Swan is a bogan nuffie who gets involved in one-sided street brawls for fun.

Quite frankly, it's an insult to have them on the same page.

I hear people saying the Brownlow should be decided by coaches and/or journalists. Help me if that ever happens. Umpires are in the thick of it every second of the game. They see who is doing the gut running. They see who is changing the course of the game. They see who is having the greatest impact.

Judd did.

Obviously the way Swan plays (or even Malthouse coaches) doesn't allow for him to be the biggest factor in the game.

Those people who are saying Judd won the Brownlow because he is the only one doing "anything" in the team need to watch a game that Carlton plays. No team is based on one player (hence the thumping we gave Richmond in Round 1). Saying that is an insult to Simpson, Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuzer etc. etc. These guys play their hearts out and to say that Judd is the only one who is doing anything on the team is ignorance.

The fact that Judd can win when no one expects it cements his legend in the standing of the game.

Swan was good at stats. Judd was the best at changing the game.

_________________
"I think everyone at the club and supporters are impatient (for success) and to be honest that is a good thing" - Chris Judd

Not sure the AFL would be too keen to have Swan being the poster boy for the AFL. Would take long before people are asking questions about the gang bashing of the poor cleaner.

On Sheahan :- Didnt he say back in 2002 that our salary cap breach was going to cost the number 1 pick Raf Clarke !
He really doesnt know much about footy.

Mike Sheahan just cracked it on 3AW when Dwayne Russell made fun of his article today in The Hun trying to justify his anti-Judd stance.

Dwayne pointed out that the "proof" Sheahan used just happened to be the the poll that Judd polled the worst in, but he didn't refer to the 3AW player of the year which Judd won.

And then Sheahan cracked it because Derr-wayne made fun of the fact that Sheahan claimed that Swan didn't poll as well because Swan- shock horror - has tattoos.

Also noticed that the caller that called Sheahan up on his Judd hate was not given a right of reply to Mike's waffle.

No mention that Ablett out voted Swan either....clearly maths is not football journos forte.

He was seriously cut, and it was hilarious listening.

I have no respect left for Shehan. I will never click on a link, read an article or watch a show that he is ever on again. He can get [REDACTED].

_________________
dane's trolling again

I don't care about Dayne Swan, it was Leon Davis who was really unlucky not to win the Brownlow.

whats all the fuss? The writing was on the wall for Swan in 2009. He's had 4 more possessions than that year. He was one of the favourites for the Brownlow. And scored 12 votes.

And as for the current obsession that you can't get 3 if your team wins, then how the heck did a plethora of blokes from bottom sides win Brownlows?

_________________
Everything before the word "but" is horseshit - J Snow

ya missed too predictable