Dally M's

So there's an article on Josh Hodgson leading the Dally M's by 4 points (Josh Hodgson extends lead at the top of the Dally M leaderboard), but if there is ever any proof that the Dally M voting system is seriously flawed, consider that Milford, after being arguably the NRL's best player over the opening month of football, has not even got 5 points to his name.

also, i thought the Dally M voting was supposed to be public in the first half of the season but I'm unable to find anything other than the few lines in said article -

On the back of another brilliant performance in the Raiders’ loss to Gold Coast on Saturday, where Hodgson set up two tries with clever dummy half play, he has moved to 10 points on the Dally M ladder, four points clear of his nearest rival.
Canterbury’s Moses Mbye is next in line on 6 points, ahead of Aiden Tolman and Greg Inglis on five points.

And a Round 3 leaderboard at the old stomping ground (2016 Dally M Leaderboard - Round 3) which also doesn't feature Milford despite starting from 2 points

Fuck the Dally m's. Fanatics player of the year is the way of the future.

Dally M is a joke, Ive watched all but 2 games of league this year so far either live or on replay.

I am doing my own dallym on foxsports and I have Hodgson on 4.

Milford on 9.
Mbye on 7

are the ones leading the way.

When you have peanuts like Freddy Fitler who cant even count to potato who spend half the game sniffing the grass during the match deciding games, you are going to get unrealistic points.

My issue is less with who getting the points & more with the system itself ie. the 4th best player in a high quality match getting nothing, while the 3rd best player in an 80 minute snoozer gets a point...

I'd much prefer something akin to the RLW POTY system, where every player gets a rank out of 10 for every game they play & then any players who played additional rep fixtures drop their lowest scores until every player has a 24 game sample size, highest overall rating wins.

surmo13 wrote:My issue is less with who getting the points & more with the system itself ie. the 4th best player in a high quality match getting nothing, while the 3rd best player in an 80 minute snoozer gets a point...

I'd much prefer something akin to the RLW POTY system, where every player gets a rank out of 10 for every game they play & then any players who played additional rep fixtures drop their lowest scores until every player has a 24 game sample size, highest overall rating wins.

It's not really that different except dud players get points and good players get 2 bites at the cherry

Krump wrote:
It's not really that different except dud players get points and good players get 2 bites at the cherry

It's makes a huge difference though, for example in a high quality match where there are 4 or 5 that deserve recognition can be given 8 or 9 out of 10, and then the man of the match in an absolute stinker of a game can be given 7 out of 10 - compare that to the current system where some of the players in the first scenario get 0 out of 3, and the player in the second scenario gets 3 out of 3

You only have to compare the rlw potys to the dally m winners to know there's a difference, they are rarely won by the same player, and you'll notice the rating system finds more consistent winners (some of which, and hold on to your hats for this shocking fact, are actually forwards) as opposed to the points system in whic some of the players on the leaderboard have racked up half or more of their score over a 5 or so week period were they caught fire.

do tend to agree with surmo, the 3-2-1 systems is also a huge benefit to spine positional players over consistent forwards


with the same 3-21 system, this sites leader board has milf and few others ahead of hodgson (who has been great but not 10 pts in 4 games great)

Here is the top of our leader board (everyone with over 3)


7 - Moses Mbye
7 - James Tedesco
6 - Corey Oates
6 - Jesse Bromwich
6 - Anthony Milford
6 - Junior Paulo
5 - James Graham
5 - Josh Hodgson
4 - Mitchel Moses
4 - Shaun Johnson
4 - Michael Ennis

Krump wrote:Fuck the Dally m's. Fanatics player of the year is the way of the future.

DallyMs are a joke. Youll never convince me that Ennis was the second best player of 2015. And all the other awards they give on the night are just as bad. NSW won the "headline moment" award for winning origin in 2014 - QLD never won it once in the past 8 years.

leaguegod wrote:do tend to agree with surmo, the 3-2-1 systems is also a huge benefit to spine positional players over consistent forwards

just on this, here are some of the winners of the RLW player of the year in NRL era

Corey Parker, Paul Gallen, hindy x 2 and steve price

none of these would ever have hope in hell in a 3-2-1 format but it didn't mean they weren't the best player that year.


also, just to prove how much better the award is

Joey: 5 time winner
JT + Cronk + Alfie + locky + freddy + Daley: 4 wins in total (none more then once)

leaguegod wrote:


just on this, here are some of the winners of the RLW player of the year in NRL era

Corey Parker, Paul Gallen, hindy x 2 and steve price

none of these would ever have hope in hell in a 3-2-1 format but it didn't mean they weren't the best player that year.


also, just to prove how much better the award is

Joey: 5 time winner
JT + Cronk + Alfie + locky + freddy + Daley: 4 wins in total (none more then once)

That'l have the QLDers back on the Dally M bandwagon.

Krump wrote:
That'l have the QLDers back on the Dally M bandwagon.

Now that you mention it... Im a bit suss on any system that has Luke Bailey as the best player of any given year.

RLW system has its faults as well.

As if anyone sits down and objectively measures the performance of every single player in a game.

This is my rendering of the thought process of someone allocating votes

Storm won, can't remember Smith doing anything but he must have been good, we'll give him an 8. Dale Finucane? fuck was he even playing. umm stats say he made a few tackles. let's give him a 7
Christian Welch. FFS I don't even know what he looks like. 5.
Munster, he scored a try, and lots of people own him in supercoach - must be a good player. 8
Cronk - he kicks the ball a lot, and he's one of the big 3. guess he must have done well. he can have 8 too.
What the hell - still another 12 players!? I'll just flip a few coins, they can have 6 or 7 each. maybe a 5 if they came off the bench.

You mean I have to do the opposition too! Fuck this shit. 7s all round.


Also, it used to be best 17 scores that counted for RLW player of the year so people weren't punished for injuries or a few bad games. They may have changed it, its been over a decade since I've ever really looked at that aways

Two of the best players on the modern era Darren Lockyer and Cameron Smith have 1 Dally M between them. To me that means the system is flawed.

The Dally M and the people that vote for them are wowed by the flashy plays. Two or three a game will have you winning a medal in no time ala Barba/Carney/JT.

I don't think you can take them seriously when Matt Orford has won as many as Cam Smith

Same thing happens in all sports that measure using this system. I remember Gilly getting ODI player of the year once when he got maybe a third of his innings as typical Gilly run a ball 80+ scores in which he polled well, but 2/3 of his scores were close to single figures.

Perhaps the only way to do this is to have some sort of subjective poll, like the NBA does for their sport with several hundred players/journalists simply voting for their MVP rather than measuring each game. Of course, that has it's own bias, but maybe that is a better measure.

Realistically, I think it comes down to how people interpret the awards, and what, and how they are measured for. Was Shaun Johnson the best player in the world last year? Of course not, but he was probably the best player in international matches. Is the Dally M for the best player in the comp? I'd say no, but it measures the best player in a 3-2-1 basis. Is the RLW award the best player? Again I'd say no, but it goes close to measuring the most consistent in their position.

I'd love to have the coaches voting on it. I think you'd see very different results no matter the system used.

Dip wrote:
Perhaps the only way to do this is to have some sort of subjective poll, like the NBA does for their sport with several hundred players/journalists simply voting for their MVP rather than measuring each game. Of course, that has it's own bias, but maybe that is a better measure.

Which brings us to another issue with how the DallyMs are done - 30% of the voters are or have been involved in one way or another with training and coaching players or sit on a team's board. How can they have integrity behind their votes?

I think the FIFA Player of the Year has it right - every nation's captain, coach and a media rep get 1 vote for somebody from another nation. Equal weighting.

good post dip


winning the dally M, RLW player of the year or even the RLPA award doesn't mean you were defs the best player but you've had to atleast be in the top tier to win any of those awards for that year. we can always argue the point but i'd still consider all of them great achievements for any player


i'm always sus on the golden boot tho, thought the andy farrel one was bad, then they gave it to kevin sinfield