Find me a 20 and 3 season besides that of Leigh Matthews and my signature is yours

[Hodgepodge]

The real discussion to be had isn't whether people qualify for a 20 and 3 but the value of doing so. Given that David Clarke did it and wasn't good enough to be selected in one team's team of the century, let alone the competition wide team, it's clearly not much.

LOL, another post of errors by Smedtsy

David Clarke didn't 20 and 3 under the 20 game qualification, but he WAS selected in Geelong's team of the century. Look it up.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Incidentally, that's not my view - that's the logical implication of yours.

LOL, you have enough trouble with making a mockery of your own logic without trying to parody anyone else's.

 

[Hodgepodge]

What are these valid reasons? It is the cut off for career statistics for cricket?

Nope, it's because it best consitutes the minimum for a football season in which excellence can be achieved and best represents the efforts of the eminent Leigh Matthews who achieved this particular feat 5 times.

 

[Tank Girl]

Nope, it's because it best consitutes the minimum for a football season in which excellence can be achieved and best represents the efforts of the eminent Leigh Matthews who achieved this particular feat 5 times.

The only real excellence in football is winning a grand final, 25 is the minimum number of games in which this can be achieved. You can't do anything in 20 games Once again, you have been beaten by your own criteria. By the way, thank you for strengthening the validity and non-arbitrary nature of my 25 game criteria. You have been found out, HodgePodge.

 

[Smedts_2]

LOL, another post of errors by Smedtsy

David Clarke didn't 20 and 3 under the 20 game qualification, but he WAS selected in Geelong's team of the century. Look it up.

I don't care about your arbitrary limit, there's an entire thread demonstrating why David Clarke 20 and 3'd

And Clarke didn't make the starting team. I don't have to look it up - I put that point to you originally. Your memory issue is a real problem.

 

[dymot]

If 20 and three was so good why didn't lefal win a brownlow when he did it then?

 

[Xanman]

If 20 and three was so good why didn't lefal win a brownlow when he did it then?

Because he had a case of clanger disposal.

 

[ChappyUK]

If 20 and three was so good why didn't lefal win a brownlow when he did it then?

Its a best and FAIREST award.

 

[dymot]

Its a best and FAIREST award.

Yeah but in those days thuggery like Matthews was always overlooked and never resulted in suspension and disqualification in the same manner it does today. Hence why guys like Chris Grant wouldn't have had issue with their stupid and manipulatively bought about suspensions.

I guess using the oversight of the brutal behaviour in Matthews era then we can safely say both Corey Mckernan and Chris Grant were much much better players than Matthews.

 

[Hodgepodge]

The only real excellence in football is winning a grand final, 25 is the minimum number of games in which this can be achieved.

LOL, no it's not. 1 is the minimum number of games in which one game can be won, even a Grand Final.

I don't care about your arbitrary limit, there's an entire thread demonstrating why David Clarke 20 and 3'd

You don't have to care about it, it's just that it exists as a level that sets Matthews apart from others. David Clarke didn't 20 and 3 under the 20 game qualification.

And Clarke didn't make the starting team. I don't have to look it up - I put that point to you originally. Your memory issue is a real problem.

It would seem that yours is, since you can't remember that Clarke made the team of the century despite pointing it out only recently.

 

[SilenceOz]

Its a best and FAIREST award.

Im pretty sure "Fairest" is just a figure of speech..
Because no ******* way was Jabs Watson playing fair when he was being injected with every chemical under the sun..

 

[Hodgepodge]

If 20 and three was so good why didn't lefal win a brownlow when he did it then?

Not sure if serious. The Brownlow is a notoriously flukey award and more often than not doesn't go to the best player.

 

[Jab]

Not sure if serious. The Brownlow is a notoriously flukey award and more often than not doesn't go to the best player.

It did in 2012 and 1996.

 

[SilenceOz]

It did in 2012 and 1996.

Oh you...

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Credit where it's due, it's 40 pages now we've been talking about HodgePodge's Humpty Dumpty impression. But I say that the greatest player of all time is the player with the greatest number of rebound 50s and hit outs combined. No idea who the might be, but these are the stats I want to cherry pick.

Na, the GOAT is Ablett Snr, which is fairly obvious. No amount of cherry picking of stats can change that fact, nor the fact that HP isn't old enough to have seen Matthews play.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Na, the GOAT is Ablett Snr, which is fairly obvious.

So obvious that he wasn't named player of the century, let alone of all time, he trails well behind Matthews in all the top 50 lists and was also on the bench in the team of the century while Matthews made the starting 18.

 

[Tank Girl]

LOL, no it's not. 1 is the minimum number of games in which one game can be won, even a Grand Final.

25 games are needed to win a grand final

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

So obvious that he wasn't named player of the century, let alone of all time, he trails well behind Matthews in all the top 50 lists and was also on the bench in the team of the century while Matthews made the starting 18.

Just accept it, it'll save you more heartbreak.

PS: Didn't read.

 

[Hodgepodge]

25 games are needed to win a grand final

You confined excellence to one game by giving the Grand Final ultimate importance.

 

[dymot]

You confined excellence to one game by giving the Grand Final ultimate importance.

Why has Leigh never won a Norm Smith?

 

[Hodgepodge]

Why has Leigh never won a Norm Smith

Didn't have a significant midfield role in the Grand Finals after the Norm was introduced. Nevertheless, did kick 11 goals in those last 3 GFs, which is a decent strike rate for a player in his 15th-17th seasons.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Some highlights from 1983 and I think 1984 right here.

 

[dymot]

Didn't have a significant midfield role in the Grand Finals after the Norm was introduced. Nevertheless, did kick 11 goals in those last 3 GFs, which is a decent strike rate.

So how come Ablett Sr, Paul Deer, Steve J won as forwards since the award was introduced?

 

[Hodgepodge]

So how come Ablett Sr, Paul Deer, Steve J won as forwards since the award was introduced?

Because they were in their prime. Matthews only moved to a forward pocket because he no longer had the legs to play significant minutes in the midfield.

Nevertheless even in his diminished form as a forward who could no longer run in the midfield, Matthews Grand Finals record was better than Ablett's even when Gary was in his prime!

 

[Paul Kersey]

Close the thread. Matthews was s**t. The MCC put up a statue of him to troll us all. Steve Johnson clearly better.