stinger wrote:the example you quoted is not the same...those people were cheated out of their medals by drug cheats....verdon didn't win......he was runner up.......years later they had to change the rules......so then pressure was put on the vfl to award retrospective brownlows......don't follow you on the plufgger one...he was a winner......verdon wasn't....and no ...lou will never be a footy legend in my eyes...they will only cheapen that status if it is bestowed on him...he was a very average footballer......
The point I was trying to make was that first past the post doen't necessarily make you the winner - even 8 years after the fact.
As for Plugger, he tied with Platten - I don't recall who had the most BOG votes? But if it had been Platten, then would Plugger not be a deserving Brownlow medallist?
There was an anomaly in the rules - they fixed it and to make it fair on everybody, they awarded retrospective medals to all those who had lost on countback.
When you think about it logically, the old rule didn't make any sense. Why bother counting 2 votes and 1 votes if the ultimate decider was only the 3 votes?
Under the old rules a guy who got 6 best on grounds beat a guy who got 18 third best on grounds - even though they both had 18 votes for the season.
As for whether Verdun was a great or average footballer?
That is purely a subjective question. There have been some brilliant footballers who have never won a Brownlow.
Conversely there have been some (IMO) ordinary footballers who have won a Brownlow (Woewodin springs to mind).
ALthough a little younger than you, I too can recall him from the 60's and he was always one of my favourites. I thought he was pretty good.
