Clement V Archer

[mdc]

Out of curiousity, what three year period are you referring to as Archer's prime?

The 3-year period was referring to Clement moreso than Archer. You'd know better than me the exact years for Archer, but something like 96-99 would be about right I would have thought. To be fair, I only started watching footy seriously in '95, so can't comment on his couple of years before that.

 

[the distributer]

hate to say it, but from what i saw of archer i thought he was one of the most overrated players going around, he was a very good player but he wasnt anywhere near the best at his craft, clement was the best mid defender for a 4/5 yr period, during his prime he was near on unbeatable, as others have stated only scarlett could compare during that time, you'd find it hard to find an area archer was better in, some say toughness, but you'd never see clement shirk an issue either, maybe hardness, but thats all and you could never call clement soft though either.

 

[MF]

Archer was a great backman but his reputation in the game was built on the tough guy persona, not his ability to beat opponents one on one (Although he did usually beat his man). He was an inspiration to his team mates and arguably a more important player to his team than Clement was to his. But Clement was the more effective defender and the better footballer.

 

[Bigeasy]

hate to say it, but from what i saw of archer i thought he was one of the most overrated players going around, he was a very good player but he wasnt anywhere near the best at his craft, clement was the best mid defender for a 4/5 yr period, during his prime he was near on unbeatable, as others have stated only scarlett could compare during that time, you'd find it hard to find an area archer was better in, some say toughness, but you'd never see clement shirk an issue either, maybe hardness, but thats all and you could never call clement soft though either.

 

[Bigeasy]

Archer was a great backman but his reputation in the game was built on the tough guy persona, not his ability to beat opponents one on one (Although he did usually beat his man). He was an inspiration to his team mates and arguably a more important player to his team than Clement was to his. But Clement was the more effective defender and the better footballer.

Check out the 1996 grand final if you want to see brilliance

 

[AG]

Archer was a great backman but his reputation in the game was built on the tough guy persona, not his ability to beat opponents one on one (Although he did usually beat his man). He was an inspiration to his team mates and arguably a more important player to his team than Clement was to his. But Clement was the more effective defender and the better footballer.

I'd agree with that. It's similar to how Kirk is rated. I think as a footballer he is slightly overrated due to what he meant to the club. Archer was similar.

Clement was an outstanding defender and one of the best I have ever seen.