Who were your Norm Smith top 3?

[kangle4]

3. Mcveigh
2. Hanners
1. Rok

I was at the game and never noticed Sewell once for some reason, couldnt believe it when I saw how many touches he had.

[Hazcam]

Watching it live I thought it was going to be either Hannebury or Sewell with Pyke as a roughie.

But seeing the replay I can see how ROK got it. Still would've given it to Dan though.

[Bloody Hell]

I vote ROK in the TLM, just cause I saw him at the contest so much.

Since then I have watched the replay 1000 times and I would say undoubtedly Hanners.

He was massive all day, but there were 2 monumental moments that changed the game:

1. That mark. So many players have mentioned it after the match...it was huge.
2. The goal. If the Hawks kicked the next they would have been out to 18 points. Brought us back to within 6.

At the time I voted it was a toss up between ROK and Hanners, but now I have no doubt.

Sewell is a funny one. If the Hawks won he would have got it, but he kicked 2 points at the end, that if he kicked goals the Hawks probably would have won....he personally had his chance and missed. For me those points but him out of contention. If he hadn't missed those shots - I may have had him ranked 1....but probably not.

[Bloody Hell]

I vote ROK in the TLM, just cause I saw him at the contest so much.

Since then I have watched the replay 1000 times and I would say undoubtedly Hanners.

He was massive all day, but there were 2 monumental moments that changed the game:

1. That mark. So many players have mentioned it after the match...it was huge.
2. The goal. If the Hawks kicked the next they would have been out to 18 points. Brought us back to within 6.

At the time I voted it was a toss up between ROK and Hanners, but now I have no doubt.

Sewell is a funny one. If the Hawks won he would have got it, but he kicked 2 points at the end, that if he kicked goals the Hawks probably would have won....he personally had his chance and missed. For me those points but him out of contention. If he hadn't missed those shots - I may have had him ranked 1....but probably not.

I don't mean if Sewell had kicked goals instead of points, I mean if he hadn't had the opportunity at all.

[Go Swannies]

Watching so many replays, I'm amazed at AJ's game. But ROK was a deserved winner of the Swan's first Norm Smith. Stood tall all day and we wouldn't have won without him.

[R-1]

Hanners
Sewell
Daylight
O'Keefe

It was hard to see a lot of ROK's work at the ground, and it's entirely possible I was confusing him and Hanners at points. However, ROK looked near omnipresent on TV, and of course the tackle count helped too.

[goswannie14]

The Norm Smith winner should always come from the winning team, I don't care how magnificent any one player from the losing team has gone, it's just not right. I think there would have been a pitch invasion if it had gone to a Hawks player!
As wonderful as Sewell was, I'm sure the medal would mean nothing to him. I remember Judds speech in 05 (and I do realise that Sewell would have been far more deserving this year than Judd was in 05), it obviously meant nought to him and to try to make an acceptance speech in the depths of heartbreak with all the booing from the crowd would be horrendous. Even Lenny has said he doesn't think much of his Norm Smith and he won his in a draw!

The exception has to be Ablett kicking 9 goals in a losing side. Thoroughly deserved.

[Jewels]

The exception has to be Ablett kicking 9 goals in a losing side. Thoroughly deserved.

That was before I followed the game so I have never seen it, but from what I have heard, Ablett winning it that day wouldn't have surprised anybody and would certainly be the exception.

[goswannie14]

That was before I followed the game so I have never seen it, but from what I have heard, Ablett winning it that day wouldn't have surprised anybody and would certainly be the exception.

I was fortunate enough to be there that day. He was awesome.

[ShockOfHair]

I vote ROK in the TLM, just cause I saw him at the contest so much.

Since then I have watched the replay 1000 times and I would say undoubtedly Hanners.

He was massive all day, but there were 2 monumental moments that changed the game:

1. That mark. So many players have mentioned it after the match...it was huge.
2. The goal. If the Hawks kicked the next they would have been out to 18 points. Brought us back to within 6.

At the time I voted it was a toss up between ROK and Hanners, but now I have no doubt.

.

Very hard to choose a Swan because of the evenness of the team but I'd probably give it to Hanners because of those moments plus a third, when he picked Lewis'(?) pocket at half back to drive us into attack deep into the fourth quarter. Definitely a game-changer.

I'd also a give a special mention to Goodes. If you could award votes on the basis of 'impact per touch' he'd surely have won. He was amazing in that last quarter. On one leg and unstoppable.

[Meg]

Very hard to choose a Swan because of the evenness of the team but I'd probably give it to Hanners because of those moments plus a third, when he picked Lewis'(?) pocket at half back to drive us into attack deep into the fourth quarter. Definitely a game-changer.

I'd also a give a special mention to Goodes. If you could award votes on the basis of 'impact per touch' he'd surely have won. He was amazing in that last quarter. On one leg and unstoppable.

Agree with both comments. That said ROK was a worthy winner.

[crackedactor]

Best player

Agree with both comments. That said ROK was a worthy winner.

Actually I thought that Sewell was the best on the ground, but they did not win and we did, so a swans player got the nod. I would have given the medal to Hanna because the times he did all the hard work was when we were under the pump such as the first quarter mark and the last quarter gaol and handball to Nick Mal.But the thing I LOVE is that we did not have one bad player! Mummy was probably our worse but he still did some useful things.

[BSA5]

For me, you can't really split ROK, Hanners and Sewell. Sewell was immense, and despite being in the losing team, I probably wouldn't have begrudged him getting it too much (god knows he would have deserved a losing NS more than Judd did). But ROK and Hanners were both fantastic. I thought the right call was made with ROK, because the game was well and truly won in close, and he was the best there. He didn't have the impact with ball in hand that Hanners did, but his job on Mitchell (who despite having 10 clearances had little influence) and work in close was magnificent. But Hanners was just there at so many important moments, it's hard to ignore him either.

So yeah, would have been satisfied with ROK or Hanners, and yes, maybe even Sewell.

[ernie koala]

Hard to pick as there was a raft of players who performed....

For me..
Sewell, Hanners, Pyke, McViegh, Rok, Malceski, Goodes on one leg, AJ, LRT for his combativeness, Smith etc etc etc....

I'm trying to think of another Hawk...Hale battled well all day.

Worst afield.....Roughead with no excuse...and Mummy with a hammy.

[Plugger1300]

Hanners was far and away the best on the ground
I would then have LRT,AJ,Pyke,Rok and Sewell fighting for the placings