View Full Version : Andrew Embley (WCE) v Cameron Bruce (Melb)
94_Eagles
4 Jul 2005, 16:24
Choose!
melbournemartin
4 Jul 2005, 16:40
hard to compare as embley has that huge frame that lets him play KP occasionally and take a strong pack mark
bruce however is a slighter frame but can still take a decent mark. same height roughly
bruce has better evasive skills but its hard for a big boy like embley to be 2 agile
bruce seems to be a very smart footballer. dun get me wrong, so is embley but bruce just seems to have excellent vision, better then most other players
http://www.footywire.com/fw/web/ft_player_compare?tid1=19&pid1=101&tid2=12&pid2=278 thats the stats. embley is slightly ahead in most bits except goals.
i reckon embley is in more of the koutafides mould. big bodied midfielder that can play KP and kick goals while bruce is more in the Hird mould. lighter build yet excellent evasive skills and football brain and also good goalkicking ability.
one other thing is that bruce can tag...thats one thing he has over embley
im going to pick bruce cos i also reckon he will make an excellent captain in the near future and one of the star midfielders in the comp. first 3 rounds shwoed just how damaging he can be. embley however will also turn into a star damaging midfielder, game vs us showed wat he is fully capable off. i just feel dat in such a packed midfield he may not get as many oppertunities as he would elsewhere.
oh n perhaps call me biased cos bruce is one of me favourites but i thought i compared em pretty equally and check footywire for stats etc
dees_best
4 Jul 2005, 16:43
Embley.
Bruce isn't influential enough in big games. He hasn't been going in overly hard lately either.
celtic_pride
4 Jul 2005, 16:47
Embley for me.
melbournemartin
4 Jul 2005, 16:47
i think that since bruce can float forward and kick goals that makes him more damaging on the scoreboard. he has kicked about 50 more goals in his career then embley from about 15 or so more games
Embley....he is just....better. Big blow to lose him for 6 weeks.
Smokin_Joe
5 Jul 2005, 17:14
i'd say Bruce , he's more damaging that embley and he can play in the center ( embleys more likely to play outside i.e wing or hff).
I'd back bruce in marking and embley in footspeed.
weagles_fan
5 Jul 2005, 17:19
I'd back bruce in marking and embley in footspeed.How many contested marks does Bruce take?Embley >>>>> Bruce at marking.
blues4flag
5 Jul 2005, 17:51
Both are very good, but Bruce, just.
Bentleigh
5 Jul 2005, 17:52
Bruce first few games this season > Embley @ his best.
2 very good players, Bruce for me. He gets a tad more of his own ball.
davey_magik
5 Jul 2005, 19:16
How many contested marks does Bruce take?Embley >>>>> Bruce at marking.
That would be true. I'm not sure about leg speed, but in terms of endurance I think Bruce would have a big edge. Don't know really, but I'd agree with dees_best that Bruce isn't performing when he is needed, Ever since that shoulder injury he seems to have lost a bit of confidence. Hopefully he gets it back because he's one of our most important and damaging players.
OneEyedHawk
5 Jul 2005, 23:10
Easily Bruce.
I checked their career stats. At 190cm's they're both terrific players but Bruce edges Embley in just about every dept. More average disposals, tackles, and goals.
Bruce's creativity and goal kicking ability is significant.
weagles_fan
5 Jul 2005, 23:52
I checked their career stats. At 190cm's they're both terrific players but Bruce edges Embley in just about every dept. More average disposals, tackles, and goals.
Bruce's creativity and goal kicking ability is significant.Embley = 24,Bruce = 25 going on 26 this year.
Nightwolf
6 Jul 2005, 00:06
Cam Bruce has gone mad
Cam Bruce has gone mad
Cam Bruce has gone mad
Cam Bruce has gone mad
Cam Bruce has gone mad
CAM BRUCE HAS GONE COMPLETELY MAD!!!!
Embley = 24,Bruce = 25 going on 26 this year.
Yeah, I know. Thanks anyway.
SaintsSupporter
9 Jul 2005, 18:19
Bruce, just. Embley will be better in the next few years, though.
larrikin
9 Jul 2005, 20:03
Embley for me, seems to just offer a bit more flexibilty that Bruce. Mind you I probably think that because I see a lot more of him....
Cerpin Taxt
10 Jul 2005, 06:12
Embley didn't really decide to start playing football until 2003, so the averages don't really reflect any current performance. Not sure what Bruce was like in his younger days though.
They're both so damaging, but Bruce can probably play inside a bit better. Embley is a better mark and is faster, but perhaps doesn't have the same endurance. I'm tmepted to say Embley, but those Bruce bags of 7 won't be easily forgotten.
melbournemartin
10 Jul 2005, 19:57
bruce had a very good debut year in 2000 after being takin in the 50s in the draft
davey_magik
10 Jul 2005, 20:29
bruce had a very good debut year in 2000 after being takin in the 50s in the draft
I think he kicked 30+ goals in his debut year.
The Silencer
10 Jul 2005, 22:19
I went with Embley...
Both are great players with bright futures, but I just feel that Embley's height and therefore marking ability gives him that extra dimension... He's one of my favourite players in the league to watch
Knowledge
10 Jul 2005, 23:47
Embley
Why you ask? Because he is my favourite non collingwood player and is a gun