Dally M system

Sabre

Well-known member
Lately i have been thinking that the current 3-2-1 system isn't very fair. I know that other sporting codes use it but i think it should be changed. It should be changed to a 5-4-3-2-1 or every player gets a rating. This is because how often in a round do you see the 4th best player on the field in one game (and get 0 points) play better than the BEST player on the field in another game (and get 3 points), its pretty common. The current system doesnt allow enough players a chance at winning the medal because they aren't being rewarded for there efforts.

What do you think?
 
it also makes it very difficult for the best player to come out of a team like Melb where they have 3 of the top 5 players (urguably). Slater, Smith and Inglis. In a team like the Cowboys every time they win 9 out of 10 times Thurston gets the points because nobody else is in his class in that team.
 
Why do you think that the Alan Border medal is a joke? to me the consistantly best each year has taken out the gong.

I think you'll find Sabre that 100% of us agree on this topic. There are numerous instances where there has been a brilliant game and the player who scored 1 point had a blinder whilst in the same round there was a stinker of a game and some lucky bloke got 3 points because he wasnt absolutely hopeless. By the way that "lucky" bloke is usualy the default pick as he is the sides marque player.
 
@wtffl2005 said:
But over the course of the season the best players do get ahead

Sometimes they do….still cant believe Hayne won it last year though, he only played well in half a dozen games at the end of the year.
There was another year where Joey carried - literally, Newcastle to the finals and was pipped by Thurston who had a good, but not extraordinary year. Being the best player in an ordinary side means you score a lot of points - case in point Farah in 07 - almost won it and we didnt even make the cut.
 
@stryker said:
@wtffl2005 said:
But over the course of the season the best players do get ahead

Sometimes they do….still cant believe Hayne won it last year though, he only played well in half a dozen games at the end of the year.
There was another year where Joey carried - literally, Newcastle to the finals and was pipped by Thurston who had a good, but not extraordinary year. Being the best player in an ordinary side means you score a lot of points - case in point Farah in 07 - almost won it and we didnt even make the cut.

Yea i guess your right

cant do much about it

Fantasy points could decide :laughing:
 
could try giving each player a rating out of 10 every game, total the rating and average it for the amount of games they've played - that way guys who play really well but get injured don't miss out - but maybe count games missed due to suspension as a played game?
 
@wicked_j said:
could try giving each player a rating out of 10 every game, total the rating and average it for the amount of games they've played - that way guys who play really well but get injured don't miss out - but maybe count games missed due to suspension as a played game?

You need a minimum amount of games. What if someone comes into a side for the last round, plays 1 game, and has a perfect 10.
 
@Marshall_magic said:
@wicked_j said:
could try giving each player a rating out of 10 every game, total the rating and average it for the amount of games they've played - that way guys who play really well but get injured don't miss out - but maybe count games missed due to suspension as a played game?

You need a minimum amount of games. What if someone comes into a side for the last round, plays 1 game, and has a perfect 10.

good idea though

i recken it would be a minimum half a season
 
i like what the AFL does it though. If a player is suspended they are in eligable, but in AFl even a 1 week suspension can rule you out, if they were to use it in the NRL it would have to be a few weeks minimum before being ineligable. So it becomes more of a 'best AND FAIREST' award
 
Back
Top