Jump to content

Brough leads Albert Goldthorpe Medal table


Recommended Posts

When you talk about the week-in week-out intensity of the NRL, it's worth mentioning that Isaac John couldn't force his way into Wakefield's team, but since going back to the NRL he has played in Penrith's last three games, and they have won them all, with John having scored three tries in one of them. I suspect he has won several points in the Dally M Medal award table, although it's surprisingly hard to find that out.

 

Sammut would be at least as good as John, if back in the NRL, so I think your criticism of him is harsh.

 

If you are saying that the NRL is not as intense as the Super League then we will have to agree to disagree. If Isaac John is at the top of the Dally M table and the end of the season it will mean that he has had a large number of top performances against a wide range of top quality teams. There won't be too many "easy wins" in there, and not as many as there would be in Super League in my opinion.

 

Again I don't want to make my criticism seem too directed at Sammut as a player, but using him as an example and you can see that Sammut has been involved in games against Leeds, Warrington, Wigan and Huddersfield in the last 2 months and in each game his team has been thrashed and has averaged less than 2 tries per game, with Sammut not particularly standing out other for than a number of missed tackles. I suspect Sammuts AG points were more likely to have come in the recent big wins against Salford and London Broncos than in those games which to me illustrates that the quality of opposition has to be considered when looking at the top performing player in Super League - given the massive disparity between the standard of the teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Funny you should mention sammut,when warrington rinsed bradford a few weeks ago, we got the 3rd and 2nd place points, sammut was given the 1point.

 

Now, bear in mind, it was a very one sided game after the first ten minutes, and during that game, i'm pretty sure sammut came up with numerous knock ons, a couple of ###### kicks that went dead and also i think gave away penalties for incorrect play the ball on two occaisions.

 

He was a big part in bradfords inability to claw back into the game.

 

And he got one 1 point, in the reporters opinion, he had performed better than the other 15 warrington players.

 

Likewise last week, a slightly more close game in parts for warrington versus sintellins at the magic weekend, jordan turner inexplicably found himself in the scoring, myler and ratch for warrington, and jordan turner(presumably cos he'd scored 2 tries) got the other as well.  Why? riley had scored twice, one a personal best, waterhouse scored two, Turner was at fault for a couple as well.

 

Now you might think this is a bit unusual, but its not. Go back to 2011 when we were putting hammerings on everyone, it was a regular occurence to see on on monday morning

3pts WArrington player

2ptsWarrington player

1pt Token gift point for player who's had 60 points put past them.

 

I understand why martyn started this competition, but the awarding of points and scoring is highly questionable when you see sympathy points being handed out like that.

indeed - some good points made above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

form team according to this award (as at June 2nd):

 

1 - Tomkins

2 - Carney

3 - Crooks

4 - Ratchford (centres seem to pick up very few points in this, so I went with him as he has played there this year)

5 - Dixon

6 - Sammut

7 - Dobson

8 - Paea

9 - Houghton

10 - Crabtree

11 - Farrell

12 - Paterson

13 - Wilkin

 

Does anybody genuinely believe this is the form 13 after 16 rounds?

After 17 rounds Brough would replace Sammut, and I don't think you'd have a bad team there at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny you should mention sammut,when warrington rinsed bradford a few weeks ago, we got the 3rd and 2nd place points, sammut was given the 1point.

 

Now, bear in mind, it was a very one sided game after the first ten minutes, and during that game, i'm pretty sure sammut came up with numerous knock ons, a couple of ###### kicks that went dead and also i think gave away penalties for incorrect play the ball on two occaisions.

 

He was a big part in bradfords inability to claw back into the game.

 

And he got one 1 point, in the reporters opinion, he had performed better than the other 15 warrington players.

 

Likewise last week, a slightly more close game in parts for warrington versus sintellins at the magic weekend, jordan turner inexplicably found himself in the scoring, myler and ratch for warrington, and jordan turner(presumably cos he'd scored 2 tries) got the other as well.  Why? riley had scored twice, one a personal best, waterhouse scored two, Turner was at fault for a couple as well.

 

Now you might think this is a bit unusual, but its not. Go back to 2011 when we were putting hammerings on everyone, it was a regular occurence to see on on monday morning

3pts WArrington player

2ptsWarrington player

1pt Token gift point for player who's had 60 points put past them.

 

I understand why martyn started this competition, but the awarding of points and scoring is highly questionable when you see sympathy points being handed out like that.

Easy.

 

League Express hate Warrington. :biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you talk about the week-in week-out intensity of the NRL, it's worth mentioning that Isaac John couldn't force his way into Wakefield's team, but since going back to the NRL he has played in Penrith's last three games, and they have won them all, with John having scored three tries in one of them. I suspect he has won several points in the Dally M Medal award table, although it's surprisingly hard to find that out.

 

A good point on Isaac John.

 

Where can I find the Albert Goldthorpe medal table?

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny you should mention sammut,when warrington rinsed bradford a few weeks ago, we got the 3rd and 2nd place points, sammut was given the 1point.

 

Now, bear in mind, it was a very one sided game after the first ten minutes, and during that game, i'm pretty sure sammut came up with numerous knock ons, a couple of ###### kicks that went dead and also i think gave away penalties for incorrect play the ball on two occaisions.

 

He was a big part in bradfords inability to claw back into the game.

 

And he got one 1 point, in the reporters opinion, he had performed better than the other 15 warrington players.

 

Likewise last week, a slightly more close game in parts for warrington versus sintellins at the magic weekend, jordan turner inexplicably found himself in the scoring, myler and ratch for warrington, and jordan turner(presumably cos he'd scored 2 tries) got the other as well.  Why? riley had scored twice, one a personal best, waterhouse scored two, Turner was at fault for a couple as well.

 

Now you might think this is a bit unusual, but its not. Go back to 2011 when we were putting hammerings on everyone, it was a regular occurence to see on on monday morning

3pts WArrington player

2ptsWarrington player

1pt Token gift point for player who's had 60 points put past them.

 

I understand why martyn started this competition, but the awarding of points and scoring is highly questionable when you see sympathy points being handed out like that.

I certainly take your point that there shouldn't be sympathy votes, and there's a lot of room for dispute about how the reporters reach their decisions. I would hate to have to defend every single one. But there are lots of examples of one team getting all six points, and deservedly so. Warrington won the club medal in 2011, and, like Shaun Wane a year later, Tony Smith was a very gracious recipient. He even sat next to Stevo at the Albert Goldthorpe lunch and I'm sure they had a very enjoyable conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny you should mention sammut,when warrington rinsed bradford a few weeks ago, we got the 3rd and 2nd place points, sammut was given the 1point.

 

Now, bear in mind, it was a very one sided game after the first ten minutes, and during that game, i'm pretty sure sammut came up with numerous knock ons, a couple of ###### kicks that went dead and also i think gave away penalties for incorrect play the ball on two occaisions.

 

He was a big part in bradfords inability to claw back into the game.

 

And he got one 1 point, in the reporters opinion, he had performed better than the other 15 warrington players.

 

Likewise last week, a slightly more close game in parts for warrington versus sintellins at the magic weekend, jordan turner inexplicably found himself in the scoring, myler and ratch for warrington, and jordan turner(presumably cos he'd scored 2 tries) got the other as well.  Why? riley had scored twice, one a personal best, waterhouse scored two, Turner was at fault for a couple as well.

 

Now you might think this is a bit unusual, but its not. Go back to 2011 when we were putting hammerings on everyone, it was a regular occurence to see on on monday morning

3pts WArrington player

2ptsWarrington player

1pt Token gift point for player who's had 60 points put past them.

 

I understand why martyn started this competition, but the awarding of points and scoring is highly questionable when you see sympathy points being handed out like that.

 

Great analysis here.  I think Sammut is great, apologies to those that watch Northern week in week out for the generalisation, but he's essentially a brilliant stand out player for them and if he's not firing then Bradford lose.  His stand out performances are worth the credit, but I hadn't considered that he was still picking up "sympathy" points in heavy defeats.

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 17 rounds Brough would replace Sammut, and I don't think you'd have a bad team there at all.

It'd be a decent team, not personally my choice, but not bad.

 

Interestingly,m the 'form' England team is:

 

Tomkins

Cockayne

Ratchford

Crooks

Dixon

Brough

Chase

Crabtree

Houghton

Peacock

Farrell

Wilkin

O'Loughlin

 

Would the England fans on the other thread prefer the team to be the above, so they can be happy with the 'form' argument?

Edited by Dave T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'd be a decent team, not personally my choice, but not bad.

 

Interestingly,m the 'form' England team is:

 

Cockayne

 

I'll single out the Wakey player, as I've seen far more of him than any other.  He's been a complete and utter liability in defence in recent weeks, regularly running in from his wing to cover the oppositions centre when he's already covered leaving his wing position open for the RL equivalent of a tap in.  

 

He's probably the most enthusiastic player in the side when it comes to putting the work in returning the ball or making himself available for the ball when in attack, and I'd hate him to lose that, but form team, oh deary me no.

Edited by Larry the Leit

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some good arguments regarding how the award could change. In general I do like the award actually, even though I think it has some flaws. I don’t necessarily agree that some of the winners/contenders devalue the award – if it was the exact same players that won everything else then there is little point in the award existing.

 

I think the “average rating” thing is good in theory, but it would make far duller reading of a Monday morning IMO. Leave that to club end of season dinners and the local papers best player award.

SQL Honours

Play off mini league winner - 2002. Bronze Medalist - 2003. Big Split Group Winner - 2006. Minor Stupidship - 2005, 2006. Cup Silver Medalist - 2008, 2009

CHAMPION - 2005, 2009, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some good arguments regarding how the award could change. In general I do like the award actually, even though I think it has some flaws. I don’t necessarily agree that some of the winners/contenders devalue the award – if it was the exact same players that won everything else then there is little point in the award existing.

 

I think the “average rating” thing is good in theory, but it would make far duller reading of a Monday morning IMO. Leave that to club end of season dinners and the local papers best player award.

I used to like the player ratings in (I think) the Rugby Leaguer. There were always players I was interested in seeing how well they were playing, when often they weren;t mentioned in the match report.

 

Maybe a combination of average points and keep the top 3 points awards as bonus points?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to like the player ratings in (I think) the Rugby Leaguer. There were always players I was interested in seeing how well they were playing, when often they weren;t mentioned in the match report.

 

Maybe a combination of average points and keep the top 3 points awards as bonus points?

 

It's all subjective, but it's not consistently subjective.  DIfferent reporters at different games each week giving out their scores, some with a far more detailed understanding of how the game is played than others.  To do it properly you'd sit the same people down each week (coaches/ex-coaches not journalists) and have them rate all players in all games, not really practical.

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to like the player ratings in (I think) the Rugby Leaguer. There were always players I was interested in seeing how well they were playing, when often they weren;t mentioned in the match report.

 

Maybe a combination of average points and keep the top 3 points awards as bonus points?

 

Maybe - certainly one of the better ideas. The idea with the points as it stands is - I think - not neccesarily the three best players in the game, but the ones who had most impact. Something along those lines anyway, as often the MOTM for a side may not be the player in that side that gets most points. Combining that and consistency would be worth invesigating anyway

SQL Honours

Play off mini league winner - 2002. Bronze Medalist - 2003. Big Split Group Winner - 2006. Minor Stupidship - 2005, 2006. Cup Silver Medalist - 2008, 2009

CHAMPION - 2005, 2009, 2010

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thanks - I scanned that page earlier, but missed the hyperlink  :banghead:

 

I also can't see a final table for last year's comp.  I've found one for after round 25, and I'd like to see where Kevin Sinfield finished in the competition for Best and Fairest player, given that the same publishing organisation that gives the award decreed him the World's best player last year.  

Edited by Larry the Leit

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks - I scanned that page earlier, but missed the hyperlink :banghead:

Casts doubt on your observational skills, does that. ;)

Here's what Melbourne Storm coach Craig Bellamy said about Kevin Sinfield's Golden Boot award after the World Club Challenge game this year:

“We know he’s a dangerous player and he probably touches the ball more than anyone else in their side other than the halfback Burrow.

“Certainly none of the criticism of the Golden Boot award came from us. We know he’s a wonderful player, and he has been for a very long time.

“At the end of the day when you are picking those sort of awards there is always going to be criticism, because there are so many wonderful players playing our game. But he was a worthy winner, and he was the guy we kept a really close eye on throughout the match. We know he’s a real competitor, a skilful player and he’s really important to their team.”

He's right. Awards always generate criticism, no matter who wins them or how the winners are decided. There is no perfect formula.

He is also right about there being so many wonderful players who play our game, award winners or not.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Casts doubt on your observational skills, does that. ;)

Here's what Melbourne Storm coach Craig Bellamy said about Kevin Sinfield's Golden Boot award after the World Club Challenge game this year:

“We know he’s a dangerous player and he probably touches the ball more than anyone else in their side other than the halfback Burrow.

“Certainly none of the criticism of the Golden Boot award came from us. We know he’s a wonderful player, and he has been for a very long time.

“At the end of the day when you are picking those sort of awards there is always going to be criticism, because there are so many wonderful players playing our game. But he was a worthy winner, and he was the guy we kept a really close eye on throughout the match. We know he’s a real competitor, a skilful player and he’s really important to their team.”

He's right. Awards always generate criticism, no matter who wins them or how the winners are decided. There is no perfect formula.

He is also right about there being so many wonderful players who play our game, award winners or not.

Pah, what does Craig Bellamy know? ;-) surely the Internet coaches on here know far more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Casts doubt on your observational skills, does that. ;)

<Snip>

 

 

Yours too, any chance of seeing a final table for the 2012 AG medal, so I can see how the World's best player (as named by LPL) faired in the competition for the Best and Fairest player (as named by LPL),

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Casts doubt on your observational skills, does that. ;)

Here's what Melbourne Storm coach Craig Bellamy said about Kevin Sinfield's Golden Boot award after the World Club Challenge game this year:

“We know he’s a dangerous player and he probably touches the ball more than anyone else in their side other than the halfback Burrow.

“Certainly none of the criticism of the Golden Boot award came from us. We know he’s a wonderful player, and he has been for a very long time.

“At the end of the day when you are picking those sort of awards there is always going to be criticism, because there are so many wonderful players playing our game. But he was a worthy winner, and he was the guy we kept a really close eye on throughout the match. We know he’s a real competitor, a skilful player and he’s really important to their team.”

He's right. Awards always generate criticism, no matter who wins them or how the winners are decided. There is no perfect formula.

He is also right about there being so many wonderful players who play our game, award winners or not.

Nice and civil there, I'm sure all his other antipodean cousins agreed didn't they?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yours too, any chance of seeing a final table for the 2012 AG medal, so I can see how the World's best player (as named by LPL) faired in the competition for the Best and Fairest player (as named by LPL),

To put you out of your misery, Sinfield came 14th in the Albert Goldthorpe table in 2012.

 

It is worth remembering that the Goldthorpe table includes Super League regular season games only. It excludes the play-offs, the Challenge Cup and the International matches, which of course are considered in the context of the Golden Boot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.