- Nov 28, 2006
- 28,823
- 11,848
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I would say that Fletcher is a better attacking defender, but both SOS and Scarlett are/were better stoppers than him.
Scarlett vs Silvagni
- Thread starter geelong_crazy26
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I would say that Fletcher is a better attacking defender, but both SOS and Scarlett are/were better stoppers than him.
Bwhahahahahahahahaha!!Hodgepodge said:
- Thread starter
- #54
HF/Wing he played in 89, not at full forward, he moved to full forward in his early thirties, his best years of football where on the HF/ Wing, not Full forward, that is purely your opinion, and i come from a family of Geelong fanaticals and between us all we know a lot more about Garry Ablett than you do, and we believe he played his best football across the flank in 89 and on the wing.
you talk about physical prime being completely different to your performance prime... but a player who is at his physical prime has the capability of performing better, when you are fitter, faster, more agile and flexible you get more out of your on field performances, you following thawn? this is just basic common sense really, but you seem to lack common sense so i will cut you some slack on this one, i am sure you will pick up on this sooner on later, once again you will continue to argue your opinion that He performed better in his thirties, once again just your opinion vs mine, and i know more about Ablett's career then you do so my opinion is held in higher regard about the topic.
No it isn't a what if, it is a fact that Ablett was quicker, fitter, more flexible and agile in his twenties then he was at the age of 33, those are facts not a what iff, A 28 year old Ablett vs Silvagni at full forward would have absolutely carved him up without a single doubt.
Experts rate Ablett as the greatest of all time, a lot of them share this opinion, no experts rate Silvagni on the same level as Ablett, A prime Ablett would have carved him up very easily, in his prime was the most talented player ever to play the game,
Unless sos played on the HBF i don't think so.
In response to your first part, that i am using a what If to answer something that never happened, it's like the equivelent of putting Mike Tyson in his prime in the Ring against Anthony Mundine, Tyson's best was just classes aboce Mundine's, just like Ablett's best Was leagues above Silvagni's.
- Thread starter
- #56
ROFLMAO
Worst analogy ever. Grow a brain you fool.
It is every bit true, when dealing with simple people you have to put things very clear with examples, Ablett's prime was classes above Silvagni.
No need to get Personal Davey magik, i know it can be frustrating arguing with someone as intelligent as i am, because you never win the arguements, but i would have thought you would be used to it by this point of time.
- Banned
- #57
Sos was a better all round player than Scarlo IMHO.
Ok, now I know for certain I was wasting my time with you. I'm not really going to repeat myself ad infinitum, but once you use hypotheticals in your argument to override established facts (that have already happened in history), then you've dug yourself a hole so deep that not even Matthew Lloyd would dive in.
Oh be quiet teenybopper.
In terms of skill, Mundine is an extremely good boxer. The only real thing Tyson would have over him is strength and size. Please try not to talk about things you don't understand, because boxing is definitely one of them.
Edit - Don't use big words Thrawn. They haven't taught what ad infinitum means in Year 8 English yet.
I guess I shouldn't have used "hypothetical" either, but I did dumb it down to "what if".
Sinner
Team Captain
I think if Scarlo and SOS played on the same team. SOS would play FB. because the facts are that he stopped players that were much better than Scarlo has even had to face. Scarlo would probably play CHB or flank and be a great rebounder. Who would be a better all round footballer? don't know, but SOS is best FB for mine.
Silvagni was like Fletcher.
Most weeks he was protected from the best forward and played on the second or third best so that he could run off them and give drive from deep in defernce, again, just like Fletcher.
Scarlett gets the same or better drive and he does it playing on the best forward each week.
IMO
FWIW.
Most weeks he was protected from the best forward and played on the second or third best so that he could run off them and give drive from deep in defernce, again, just like Fletcher.
Scarlett gets the same or better drive and he does it playing on the best forward each week.
IMO
FWIW.
- Thread starter
- #63
this is how a man that has lost the argument talks, deviates of topic into personal criteria because he has no idea what to say on the topic,
what is worse Thrawn, a teenager in some of his spare time on big footy, or a grown adult sitting on big footy every day? don't you have a job and a family to occupy your time with? and you hint that i am pathetic, my gosh, you need a big reality check, or employment
.
Different players for different eras
Silvagni had to play on the old style power forwards every week.
Carey (Arguably best ever player), Lockett (1300 goals), Dunstall (1000+ goals), Richardson (played on him when Richo was a forward), Longmire (Quality) , Lloyd (Quality), Ablett (Kept him goalless in a GF), Lynch (freak), Modra (100 goal kicker), Sumich (100 goal kicker), etc
He didn't need to set up attack like the modern game demands. Instead, he had to stop 10 goal bags. Mind you, he kicked over 300 goals himself!
Scarlett plays in a different era that demands attack and set up from FB. He plays on a different kind of player. FF's rarely kick 100 goals a season anymore. They have more freedom to run and set up
Silvagni had to play on the old style power forwards every week.
Carey (Arguably best ever player), Lockett (1300 goals), Dunstall (1000+ goals), Richardson (played on him when Richo was a forward), Longmire (Quality) , Lloyd (Quality), Ablett (Kept him goalless in a GF), Lynch (freak), Modra (100 goal kicker), Sumich (100 goal kicker), etc
He didn't need to set up attack like the modern game demands. Instead, he had to stop 10 goal bags. Mind you, he kicked over 300 goals himself!
Scarlett plays in a different era that demands attack and set up from FB. He plays on a different kind of player. FF's rarely kick 100 goals a season anymore. They have more freedom to run and set up
PrinceDaniel
Senior List
Silvagni had the task of playing against Lockett, Ablett, Carey, Modra and others. He was fairly consistent and in my opinion, did a better job then I could imagine Scarlett doing on those players. Don't get me wrong, I think Scarlett is a terrific defender, he's just outweighed by Silvagni.
Did you actually ever see Silvagni play? Some of his scalps included Ablett in the '95 GF (no goals) & Carey, '99 GF (Carey was moved in to the midfield to get a kick). He always played on Lockett, Modra, Dunstall & in the latter years of his career, Lloyd.
Silvagni's first responsibility was as a stopper & if he got well on top of his opponent, then he would run off them. I would be interested to hear who you thought was playing on the opposition's best forward if Silvagni wasn't.
Granted he often started on the best forward but was often replaced if he was being beaten.
Don't get me wrong he was a great player and deserves his place as full back in the team of the century, but if he had had Scarletts entire career to compete with for that position I feel that he would have mised out.
Luckily he played last century so he deserves all the acolades he gets.
In answer to your question in the early part of his career Peter Dean was often used on key forwards and later in his career (god knows why) Manton often go the number 1 forward.
I would also say that there was 2 forwards in particular that he matched up on exceptionally well in Ablett and Modra, and he also had the wood on Dunstall except for a couple of games when Dunstall got away from him.
He did not have a great record against Lockett, Carey, Richo, or Sav Rocca.
Ridiculous. He played on the best forward almost all the time. The 2nd or 3rd best forward? Rofl.
Scarlett's career to date doesn't even match Silvagni's.
Bullshit.
He constantly beat Lockett. In fact, there were probably only two or three games where he got pantsed by him. I don't recall Carey ever beating him when they played on each other, in fact, if you look at his games against Carlton you will find he didn't really have too much of an influence. As far as Richo and Sav goes, I don't recall this "good record" against SOS so please show us the stats. Silvagni's last game with a screwed up hip and an injured ankle managed to restrict Richo to 2 goals and a handful of possessions... Richo himself even said Silvagni was his toughest opponent ever.
I'll tell you this though: Modra has more success vs SOS than Carey or Richo did.
In terms of technique I'd argue the other way but I'll stay on topic here.
Silvagni gets my vote.
- Banned
- #71
I didn't say Scarlett was completely "clean", but i do think he plays a lot "cleaner" than Silvagni did, but still manages to get the job done. There's a difference between the two, and that was my point.
I respect Silvagni for what he was able to achieve, and if he could get away with it then in a way i think good on him. Anyway, just my opinion, but I think Silvagni would have struggled more if he was forced to play at the level of "rule observance" that Scarlett does.
- Thread starter
- #72
in the modern day umpiring has become much stricter, back in the days of Silvagni, holding the players jumpers, chopping the arms and pushes in the back were largely overlooked, in today's modern game any contact what so ever to the forwards body while he is leading is a free kick, I would like to see how Silvagni would go with today's modern game.
Scarlett is much more skilled, clean, and damaging than SOS ever was with the ball, He got 30 disposals from full back in a grand final, which has to be one of the single most best performances from a full back ever.
- Banned
- #73
lol sos by a bit.
This sort of thinking always amuses me. If we were to follow this logic we would be expected to believe that players like Dick Reynolds, Bobby Skilton, Ian Stewart etc would not have been able to cope with the attention of taggers. Defenders who relied on deliberately kicking the ball out of bounds to clear the danger area would not have coped with the introduction of the out of bounds on the full rule. Jason Dunstall wouldn't have kicked as many goals because he wouldn't be able to use his hands to ease defenders under the ball.
Champions of any era, SOS included, would adapt to whatever rules they had to play by. This is why they were champions. How quickly have the current players adapted to the stricter interpretation of the hands-in-the-back rule? When the stricter interpretation was first used, coaches wanted everyone to believe that the 'sky was going to fall'.
During the next school holidays, grab yourself some DVDs/videos of games prior to 2007 & you will receive quite an education. You will discover that prior to Geelong's great 2007 (& so far 2008), there were champion players & champion teams from all eras every bit as good as, if not better than what your sheltered view has allowed you to see so far in your short life.
