Carlton 1979-82; Why don't we rate them?

[South of the Yarra]

Yes in 1929. 18 home and away games. Congrats you must be so proud. Hope you bought your dvd.

Yes and playing 9 away games at grounds where the home team had a massive advantage and yet still winning. Unlike Essendon who played most of their games at their own home base. Essendon failed to go through the whole H and A season undefeated, Collingwood achieved it. You should be used to failure at Essendon. Clubs with 16 year Premiership droughts get desperate. .... Because their is no DVD .... This lessens the achievement ... Your lack of respect for the history of this great game is a disgrace. No wonder your club has become what it has. Give me a great club like Carlton over Essendon any day.

 

[South of the Yarra]

Carlton's reserves teams from that period always boasted players who made you think "Why can't he get a game?". Tremendous depth. They were the first team I grew to fear as an opposition supporter, and their theme song was the sound of doom.

Exactly the same Ron. Hated them but by God I respected them.

 

[Peter Bosustow]

But you did. Cracking game.

Preach! As a Collingwood supporter I'd be angrier with 1981 - up by 20 odd points in time on in the 3rd..

If I had one team to play for my life on Grand Final day, it would be that Carlton 1979-1982 team. They were cavaliers and played with an aura of invincibility reminiscent of the 2008 and 2011 H&A seasons of Geelong and Collingwood (for our younger posters). During the 1982 season the premiership was Richmond's to lose according to most. Heck, even Survivor's "Eye of the Tiger" was #1! And despite getting rolled in the 2nd semi by the Tigers and going the long way home via Hawthorn, they still managed to get it done. They are often forgotten because their 'era' is sandwiched between Richmond in the 60s/70s and Hawthorn in the 70s/80s teams not to mention other 'less dynastic' teams like North and Essendon. Growing up I just knew we'd come out and blitz teams in the 3rd quarter irrespective of how far behind we were. And if we were kicking towards the Heatley Stand in the final quarter, we weren't losing. Glory days.

Despite my bias, that Geelong team stacks up really well against my childhood heroes and that is saying something
Carlton: The Buzz, Harmes, Fitzpatrick, Doull, Asho, Dominator, Hunter, Swanny McKay, English, Buckley, McConville, McClure, Alex Marcou.
Geelong: Ablett, Bartel, Stevie J, Chapman, Hawkins, Enright, Kelly, Corey, Scarlett, Taylor, Ling, Ottens, Mackie.

 

[Gone Critical]

One other factor which hasn't been mentioned here and is probably often overlooked when discussing who dominated the era was zoning. It ended up being unequal and gave a few clubs such as Carlton and Hawthorn a tremendous advantage.

Zoning was the division of country Victoria into 12 hopefully equal zones and each club had the right to recruit players from their zone. Zones were drawn up in 1967 and the draw was literally done by drawing a zone out of the premiership cup, a lucky dip. Each club was meant to work in their zone to promote footy and benefit from the recruits. Kenneth Luke was the VFL boss at this time and oversaw the implementation. After 3-5 years the zones were meant to rotate for fairness purposes. This never happened.

Problem was zones were never equal and disparity grew as population changes occurred. Hawks got the Morninton Peninsula from Frankston down and that population expanded greatly. Carlton got a beauty with the strong Bendigo area and NM did well with Albury/Wodonga and the OM area which grew. Saints and Dees got much lesser areas. Wasn't a surprise they were cellar dwellers in the era.

Some cynics would say Luke, a Carlton man, lost the desire to rotate the zones once he saw what Carlton had obtained. How trus that is I am not sure.

 

[Jesse Custer]

Yes and playing 9 away games at grounds where the home team had a massive advantage and yet still winning. Unlike Essendon who played most of their games at their own home base. Essendon failed to go through the whole H and A season undefeated, Collingwood achieved it. You should be used to failure at Essendon. Clubs with 16 year Premiership droughts get desperate. .... Because their is no DVD .... This lessens the achievement ... Your lack of respect for the history of this great game is a disgrace. No wonder your club has become what it has. Give me a great club like Carlton over Essendon any day.

Haha go harder son. Great tasting fish

 

[Roddy]

In terms of the attention this period gets, it gets swallowed up and overshadowed by our sides of the 70s, which won 3 flags before this, and 80s/early 90s, which won 5 after.

 

[Tuco]

The fact is that as every day passes another give-a-**** fairy dies.

The Lions, Geel and even the current day Hawks will become footnotes eventually.

We've had numerous dynasties over the history of the code. We've had numerous three-peats. We've even had four-peats. Too many back-to-backs to even be worth commenting on. There's literally nothing new to talk about here.

I'm not saying it's right or just. It just...is.

If you lived through an era you'll probably always want to hold onto it. Everyone wants their time following footy to be relevant. Or if they didn't see it personally, they want the team they follow to be most valued.

So you'll vent to all the kids about how great it was back in your day. Some of these kids will agree. Some will just nod slowly and look for the nearest fire exit.

FWIW any team that wins a flag deserves to be remembered. But trying to elevate teams any further than that is doomed over time.

History is important. But it's full of dead people.

 

[OneEyedHawk]

If father son was such a big deal for Geelong, perhaps it's Hawthorn who have benefitted most from changes to the rules like Free Agency which has nabbed Lake and Frawley. Priority draft picks which nabbed the Hawks Roughead, Hodge and Ellis plus the timely introduction of GWS and GC to keep other sides down just as the hawks were hitting their straps.

Don't pretend like the Hawks haven't been beneficiaries of fortuitous rule changes to get where they are now.

Hawks have benefitted from Free Agency? News to me...gained Frawley & Simpkin, lost Franklin, Ellis and Young.

Also, Hodge was not a priority pick. He was traded for.

You're not very good at this, are you?

 

[Yellow Feathers]

I'm just blown away by how many of you remember teams from the 70s. Unreal. Old farts!

Watching old footage of the "bomb it forward" culture, without any gameplan, makes me wonder if these pre-AFL sides can be taken seriously.

The game is so much different now with complex game plans (zoning etc), draft system, salary caps and the absolute professionalism required to play the game.

Surely sides of the modern era would wipe the floor with teams from the 50s - 70s. The current Hawthorn side would run them off their feet.

 

[Samthegun]

Who on Bigfooty actually knows this far back? Can't rate something you don't know about.

 

[gavaniacono]

Preach! As a Collingwood supporter I'd be angrier with 1981 - up by 20 odd points in time on in the 3rd..

If I had one team to play for my life on Grand Final day, it would be that Carlton 1979-1982 team. They were cavaliers and played with an aura of invincibility reminiscent of the 2008 and 2011 H&A seasons of Geelong and Collingwood (for our younger posters). During the 1982 season the premiership was Richmond's to lose according to most. Heck, even Survivor's "Eye of the Tiger" was #1! And despite getting rolled in the 2nd semi by the Tigers and going the long way home via Hawthorn, they still managed to get it done. They are often forgotten because their 'era' is sandwiched between Richmond in the 60s/70s and Hawthorn in the 70s/80s teams not to mention other 'less dynastic' teams like North and Essendon. Growing up I just knew we'd come out and blitz teams in the 3rd quarter irrespective of how far behind we were. And if we were kicking towards the Heatley Stand in the final quarter, we weren't losing. Glory days.

Despite my bias, that Geelong team stacks up really well against my childhood heroes and that is saying something
Carlton: The Buzz, Harmes, Fitzpatrick, Doull, Asho, Dominator, Hunter, Swanny McKay, English, Buckley, McConville, McClure, Alex Marcou.
Geelong: Ablett, Bartel, Stevie J, Chapman, Hawkins, Enright, Kelly, Corey, Scarlett, Taylor, Ling, Ottens, Mackie.

Without going overboard in praise of the Ol' Blues (my Tiger ancestors will be furious with this), the 68, 70, 72 teams were "pretty handy" too. 70 and 72 were strokes of coaching genius carried out by classy teams. Has there been higher levels of risk taking in GFs than those two years? I'd like to know what they are. Blues get props for being adventurous. 68 they beat Essendon, everyone thanks you for that. In those days I was fiercely parochial and wouldn't tolerate the idea that any team could be better than Richmond. It was simply impossible, and crazy. We beat the Blues twice in 69 and 73 and I always felt that most of the time (exclude 72, even though we beat them by 8 goals in a semi) we had the Blues number by being tougher and unrelenting. I certainly felt this way up to the GF of 82 (we flogged Blues in the 80s and 82s semis, 80 being memorable for Jewell (a very handy fighter by the way) punching (or slapping) Big Percy across the face at quarter time). They were different times, they were actually the best of times it turns out. Though confident in 82, Bourkey's stringent fitness test of Malthouse re-injuring him forcing him out had me concerened - Malthouse was a very key player for us in those days. Oh well, rest is history. Aging has made me far less parochial to the extent that praising opposition teams comes very naturally now, aided by the Tigers state of affairs obviously. I guess the game itself is less parochial too these days with high levels of trading, loss of local grounds, and the AFL becoming the brand rather than fierce and often violent rivalry between clubs which was always a blood rushing experience in the ol' days, especially if one's penchant was locating oneslef in the middle of the opposition fans, which was our want. Young and foolish. My memories of Windy Hill and Victoria Park are still vivid. Moorabbin was not to be underestimated either. The only real fun these days apart from the absolutely dazzling skills of many players, is the opportunity to pour scorn on the whiners who complain about umpires losing games for their teams. It was never on, and shouldn't be now - a loss is a loss blame yourself.

 

[Roddy]

I'm just blown away by how many of you remember teams from the 70s. Unreal. Old farts!

Watching old footage of the "bomb it forward" culture, without any gameplan, makes me wonder if these pre-AFL sides can be taken seriously.

The game is so much different now with complex game plans (zoning etc), draft system, salary caps and the absolute professionalism required to play the game.

Surely sides of the modern era would wipe the floor with teams from the 50s - 70s. The current Hawthorn side would run them off their feet.

Agreed. I'm an 'old fart', I turn 45 this month. But unlike many other old farts, I don't get caught up in the whole 'things were so much better in the good old days' nonsense. If Hawthorn of '15 played Hawthorn of '83, 15 would beat 83 by 250 points. The Hawks of '89 might get within 10 goals.

 

[pazza]

Was only watching some of those matches this morning.

Their opponents were equally as good, much like Essendon and hawthorn immediately after them.

The Collingwood teams were strong.

Brownlow Medallist Peter Moore, Ray and Tony Shaw, Peter Daicos, Ricky Barham, Rene Kink...the reliable Peter McCormack and of course had the legendary Tom Hafey as their coach.

Richmond too was strong. Bartlett, Bourke, Weightman, Cloke, Roach, "General" Lee, Jess.

The grand finals at the time were as much as a battle of wits as anything else.

 

[sproketman]

I do get a chuckle about the hard on for the 'equalization' era when since 2000 we've had 3 dominant dynasties in just 15 years.

That salary cap though!

Yeah it's kind of nonsense that people exlcude pre-salary cap eras as being irrelevant, when we're on the verge of having a second threepeat in 15 years, after not having one in the VFL for 50 years before that.

 

[gavaniacono]

Bay 13 thread. Clearly trying to draw in and provoke. Not worthy of a discussion

You have completely misinterpreted the OP. There is no hint of provocation, just discussion, on a very interesting point that is of interest to some of us around at the time.

 

[gavaniacono]

sorry but anything pre-AFL era pales in comparison to what brisbane, hawthorn and to a lesser extent geelong have done. i'm willing to give hawthorn the undisputed champion team of all time if they win on Saturday. in an era what equalisation is supposed to be making it harder to keep winning, where 18 teams spread the talent thinner than ever before, not to mention all the travelling and everything else that goes with the modern game it's just so hard to stay at the top for so long.

No need being sorry for being foolish. Just try to improve. Noone has said that a team from 30 years ago could compete with a modern team. They couldn't. The question is how strong they were WITHIN their era.

 

[sproketman]

This

Hawks and Cats of modern day are more impressive as the whole competition is on a relatively level playing field with a salary cap and drafting.

Is that really true?

In the 70s and 80s footballers were still expected to have jobs, footy was not a career. Did salary differences really change things much? Carlton of that era, and Hawthorn of the 80s, didn't tend to poach players from other clubs. More recruits from other clubs play for the great Hawthorn team now than did in the great Hawthorn side of the 80s.

These days it is a career and clubs bend over backwards to accommodate them. It's quite possible the competition was on a more level playing field 30 years ago.

Look at the great 1989 Hawthorn side:

http://afltables.com/afl/stats/games/1989/091019890930.html

None of them played at any other VFL club prior to coming to Hawthorn.

Compare with the (likely) side this weekend:

http://afltables.com/afl/stats/games/2015/081020150925.html

Seven players from other clubs. Eight if Gunston plays.

 

[Gone Critical]

I'm just blown away by how many of you remember teams from the 70s. Unreal. Old farts!

Watching old footage of the "bomb it forward" culture, without any gameplan, makes me wonder if these pre-AFL sides can be taken seriously.

The game is so much different now with complex game plans (zoning etc), draft system, salary caps and the absolute professionalism required to play the game.

Surely sides of the modern era would wipe the floor with teams from the 50s - 70s. The current Hawthorn side would run them off their feet.

I too am an old fart. Remember the late 60s onwards. No way any of these teams or teams from 80s , 90's, 00's live wi.th our current teams. The game continues to progress and improve. The bravery, size, strength and skill of the modern player is something past players could only dream of.

 

[footyfan1978]

Again I would look at it differently. North likewise had dropped a bit from their great days. They did challenge a bit in 79 but after that were either near the bottom of the 5 or missing. Didn't challenge strongly for a flag through these years. Tigers as I mentioned were a good side through this era not a great one. Great in the current conversation are Blues 79-82 or Hawks 83 on even Bombers 84-85. Richmond wasn't in that class.

I hear your view but to borrow your own phrase , again I would look at it differently. I would suggest 1982 as an example when Carlton ended 1st, Richmond 2nd , Hawks 3rd and North 4th as having the best quality lists of a top 4 sides I can remember in all my time of following football. It may have been even better in the late 60s and early 70s but I was not watching then so cannot say.
You say North dropped away. I would contend they got overtaken by the likes of Carlton getting stronger in quality and Richmond too. This is why they did not make the grand final in my view. Hawthorn had Dermot Brereton on debut kick them out eventually at the G in finals. Sometimes you just fail to make it as others rise to the top.

Lets look at some of quality of North's list that ended 4th that season.
Wayne Schimmelbusch
Malcolm Blight
Gary Dempsey
Keith Greig
Ross Glendinning
David Dench
Phil Carman
Phil Krakouer
Jim Krakouer
Bruce Abernethy
Kym Hodgeman
Phil Kelly
Arnold Briedis
Kerry Good
Ross Henshaw
Stephen McCann
Xavier Tanner
Craig Holden
The quality of the players they could put on field were top shelf.
Almost nuts the cream of the crop in terms of quality.
No club now would be able to fit the cream of the crop in current football prices anywhere near under the salary cap.

Hawthorn had a list with the likes of
Leigh Matthews
Gary Ayres
Gary Buckenara
Terry Wallace
Kelvin Moore
Chris Mew
Peter Knights
Michael Tuck
Russell Greene
Michael Moncrief
John Kennedy
Peter Schwab
Richard Loveridge
Alan Goad
Rodney Eade
Geoff Ablett
a young Gary Ablett
Colin Roberston
Dipper
Peter Russo
Brereton
Polkinghorne
O'Hallaron
Michael Byrne
Ian Paton
A list with two of the greatest players of all time in a few games such as Lethal Leigh and Gary Ablett were unable to make the grand final that year.
Why, because Richmond and Carlton were just damn bloody good.

"what I am saying there were not two all time great sides going head to head in Carlton's years 79-82."

I would contend because the quality of some of the top four or five in many of those years was too strong for just two clubs to dominate. I would suggest the 3rd premiership in 1982 in four years highlighted to me there were four awesome clubs in terms of talent around in that year to just even make the grand final, let alone win it.
4 does not go into 2. I actually believe it is easier to dominate now as you will never find the quality in top four clubs can get to that level ever again. The salary caps and drafts do not allow it.

 

[Bostonian]

Surely sides of the modern era would wipe the floor with teams from the 50s - 70s. The current Hawthorn side would run them off their feet.

They might run the off their feet but teams from back then would physically target a player like Mitchell and smash him in the literal sense. They threw real punches back then and made them stick.

 

[Gone Critical]

They might run the off their feet but teams from back then would physically target a player like Mitchell and smash him in the literal sense. They threw real punches back then and made them stick.

Yes threw more punches, often from behind, did more dirty acts, took many more short steps etc. Level of bravery and commitment to the contest is unsurpassed today. Players of the 70's would have been smaller, weaker, slower etc. just would not have lived with Mitchell.

 

[Yellow Feathers]

They might run the off their feet but teams from back then would physically target a player like Mitchell and smash him in the literal sense. They threw real punches back then and made them stick.

Somehow I think Mitchell would enjoy that kind of freedom

 

[Bostonian]

Yes threw more punches, often from behind, did more dirty acts, took many more short steps etc. Level of bravery and commitment to the contest is unsurpassed today. Players of the 70's would have been smaller, weaker, slower etc. just would not have lived with Mitchell.

Ken Hunter's bravery to the contest surpasses pretty much todays whole league. And that's only one player from back then.

 

[caveman72]

If father son was such a big deal for Geelong, perhaps it's Hawthorn who have benefitted most from changes to the rules like Free Agency which has nabbed Lake and Frawley. Priority draft picks which nabbed the Hawks Roughead, Hodge and Ellis plus the timely introduction of GWS and GC to keep other sides down just as the hawks were hitting their straps.

Don't pretend like the Hawks haven't been beneficiaries of fortuitous rule changes to get where they are now.

Expansion has benifited hawks more than any team.

 

[South of the Yarra]

Ken Hunter's bravery to the contest surpasses pretty much todays whole league. And that's only one player from back then.

Agreed Kenny Hunter was 50 times more Coursgeous then any player today. And I could name another 20 players as hard as him. The game was so much harder and tougher. It was played by footballers not chemically and lab designed athletes.