Hird Vs Buckley

[carltonlover3]

this caused an argument over the discussion of who was greater.
thoughts?

 

[thebigboy]

There's been a fair few polls on this already mate but FWIW, Hird.

 

[carltonlover3]

ok sorry about that i didnt really think of looking for past ones.

 

[thebigboy]

ok sorry about that i didnt really think of looking for past ones.

Thats alright mate people's opinions change every 30 seconds on here. A lot of people have made polls and not looked, me included.

 

[mark73]

At least this Hird poll is a little closer to reality.

 

[MagpieGirl_13]

BUCKS!!!
He is like God! I love the bloke, my hero!

 

[PieLebo87]

I don't see the similiarities for comparison other then they are both true champions of the game that will be long remembered.

Wouldn't really want to choose. Interesting to read why for anyone that does choose. Don't think theres much either player isn't capable of.

Its a myth that Hird hasn't got superb field disposals (MAY'VE dropped off in the last seasion, but was always reasonably good) and its a myth that Buckley isn't a match-winner (Most recently, ask the Lions after that '06 Dome game [20+ possessions and 5 goals from a 33yo]).

 

[DapperDon]

I don't see the similiarities for comparison other then they are both true champions of the game that will be long remembered.

Wouldn't really want to choose. Interesting to read why for anyone that does choose. Don't think theres much either player isn't capable of.

Its a myth that Hird hasn't got superb field disposals (MAY'VE dropped off in the last seasion, but was always reasonably good) and its a myth that Buckley isn't a match-winner (Most recently, ask the Lions after that '06 Dome game [20+ possessions and 5 goals from a 33yo]).

lol, you still chose Buckley i see

 

[betterthanu]

Buckley

 

[Randy_UpThere]

Hird, undoubtfully

 

[PieLebo87]

lol, you still chose Buckley i see

Very constructive!

I guess Im not taking a BigFooty poll as serious as some overs do! I guess if I vote that Im a Hawthorn supporter in the other poll then that must be the case

Its a popularity contest on here. I voted Buckley for the sake of voting for Buckley, because Im a Collingwood supporter. I'd hope next time you reply to what I've written, champ

 

[Masss#10]

picked Hird because as much as i hate hird..i hate buckley more

 

[carltonlover3]

picked Hird because as much as i hate hird..i hate buckley more

theres nothing to hate about hird.
plenty to hate about buckley though.

 

[DapperDon]

Very constructive!

I guess Im not taking a BigFooty poll as serious as some overs do! I guess if I vote that Im a Hawthorn supporter in the other poll then that must be the case

Its a popularity contest on here. I voted Buckley for the sake of voting for Buckley, because Im a Collingwood supporter. I'd hope next time you reply to what I've written, champ

feel free to look up the other 2000 threads on the same topic to get my response, next time I hope you do your research.........champ

 

[J-Ro-20]

I've decided to be a fence sitter. its too tough to tell

although i must say buckley hurt the crows more.

for some reason buckley loved coming back to Adelaide to collect yet another 40 possessions.

 

[scottyt2]

hird
has won more games off his own boot

 

[RunDoggieRun]

agreed

 

[MinerBoy]

I chose Buckley. The most consistent of the two and always at a very high quality.

I find it hard to rate Hird at times. Sometimes I agree with his assessment by most as an all time great and at other times I feel he is one of the most over-rated players of all time. This is not a slight on his ability, as he had it in abundance and was certainly a match winner on many occassions. However, for all his great games, he fell short of the other greats of his era in being a consistently good player every week. Not to say he was inconsistent, but his games that weren't great were less good than those of his peers. Similarly, what type of champion player was he? Undoubtedly, Buckley was a champion midfielder/onballer. Hird is a forward/onballer but wasn't really ever in the top notch as either. As an onballer the following are just some of those who were better during the same era: Cousins, Crawford, Harvey, Buckley, Voss, West, Ricciuto, Judd, Black. As a forward, he was bettered by the likes of Carey, Richo, Lloyd, Hall, Brown, Reiwoldt, Pav, Fev, Lynch (A), Gehrig, Tredrea, Neitz. etc

Yet no doubt he was a champion. I guess more so because of his ability to alter the course of a match regardless of what position he played. However, if I had to pick one of the two players to play for my side I would select Buckley because I think he would produce really high quality football that contributed to the team winning games more often than Hird, who would just be part of the team for a lot of the time, but then rip a few games up completely.

Sorry if that's long winded, but I hope you get the jist.

 

[CENTERMAN]

It's a cruel poll as everybody hates Buckley apart from magpie supporters of course.
Hird cant kick
Hird no left foot
Hird no left h ball
I'm biased too, Bucks was the true perfectionist and played both ends of the ground not just forward thrusts.

 

[jako27]

I chose Buckley. The most consistent of the two and always at a very high quality.

I find it hard to rate Hird at times. Sometimes I agree with his assessment by most as an all time great and at other times I feel he is one of the most over-rated players of all time. This is not a slight on his ability, as he had it in abundance and was certainly a match winner on many occassions. However, for all his great games, he fell short of the other greats of his era in being a consistently good player every week. Not to say he was inconsistent, but his games that weren't great were less good than those of his peers. Similarly, what type of champion player was he? Undoubtedly, Buckley was a champion midfielder/onballer. Hird is a forward/onballer but wasn't really ever in the top notch as either. As an onballer the following are just some of those who were better during the same era: Cousins, Crawford, Harvey, Buckley, Voss, West, Ricciuto, Judd, Black. As a forward, he was bettered by the likes of Carey, Richo, Lloyd, Hall, Brown, Reiwoldt, Pav, Fev, Lynch (A), Gehrig, Tredrea, Neitz. etc

Yet no doubt he was a champion. I guess more so because of his ability to alter the course of a match regardless of what position he played. However, if I had to pick one of the two players to play for my side I would select Buckley because I think he would produce really high quality football that contributed to the team winning games more often than Hird, who would just be part of the team for a lot of the time, but then rip a few games up completely.

Sorry if that's long winded, but I hope you get the jist.

agree with all you said.

 

[Coin_Toss]

It doesn't matter who was better, the facts are they were champion players for their respective teams. Hird might have been better than Buckley, but Bucks has been one of the most consistent midfielders in the modern era. Anybody who disagrees should be shot.

 

[thebigboy]

It's a cruel poll as everybody hates Buckley apart from magpie supporters of course.
Hird cant kick
Hird no left foot
Hird no left h ball
I'm biased too, Bucks was the true perfectionist and played both ends of the ground not just forward thrusts.

When did Buckley play in the back half for longer than 10 mins? Hird quite often early in his career went back to CHB when we were in trouble.

 

[Carn Hawkas]

Hird, hes a champ.