Remove this Banner Ad

Jason Dunstall vs Tony Lockett

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The way I think of it, how would Dunstall have gone had he played for St Kilda in the mud in the 80's, in a terrible team, with poor delivery and then for us in the 90's and Sydney after that and conversely, how would Lockett have gone had he been getting the lace-out delivery all day long from the likes of Buckenara, Pritchard, Platten, Jarman, etc, in a dominant team, year after year, in his prime years (before injuries started to take a toll)?

Take 1989 as an example. In spite of the fact that we finished 3rd last that year, Plugger was extraordinarily dominant and kicked a whopping 78 goals from just 11 games. That's just half a season, without any finals. Had he been playing for Hawthorn that year, played the 24 games that Dunstall played and maintained that average, he would have had a 170 goal season! Playing for a better, more dominant team, he may have even kicked more than that. That's how well he was going that year (at just 23yo) and how good he was.

Lockett was so good that it didn't really matter how we got it to him, but he still would have gotten more chances and much better delivery had he been playing for Hawthorn instead and as such it blows my mind to think of how many goals he would have kicked in those seasons when Hawthorn dominated, had he been playing for them, like Dunstall was, compared to how many he kicked for us in the mud at Moorabbin and so-on.

It would have also been a hell of a lot harder to double-team Lockett (or for the likes of Monkhurst to drop back into the hole in front of him) had he been playing at the bigger Waverley ground more in the 80's, like Dunstall was. Left one-out, there just would have been no stopping him. He would have just killed them on the lead, in the air, whatever. I genuinely reckon he might have given 2000 career goals a nudge had he been the one recruited by Hawthorn. Injuries (and suspensions) also held him back a considerable amount over the journey.

I think if you asked anyone who played full forward which team they would have preferred to play for, that they would have 100% picked Hawthorn over us and that's because it would have been a much, much easier gig and given them a much greater chance to dominate (on top of the other reasons you'd pick them- perhaps unless you already barracked for us).

Plugger dominated extraordinarily in spite of playing for us.

Dunstall, who I saw a heap of, was bloody good, very consistent, team oriented and very professional, but Plugger was just in another league, especially in the 80's, before his body started to hold his performances back.

Some evidence for this I believe is that by the time Lockett was the age Dunstall was when made his debut (ie. the season they both turned 21yo- for Lockett, 1987, for Dunstall, 1985), Tony had already won a freaking Brownlow medal and that when he was just 18yo, in the team that came dead-last, Lockett kicked an incredible 77 goals (in his 2nd season, from 20 games). That's right, 77 goals, at 18yo, in the team that came last (with just 5 wins). Dunstall also kicked 77 goals in his 2nd season (after kicking 36 in 16 games in his debut year), but in his case he was 22yo, played 22 games and was playing for the team that won 18 games in the H&A rounds and then the premiership.

Plugger was just on another level and it's a shame that more didn't get to see him when he was in his absolute prime, in those late 80's (due to the fact he played for a terrible team, who didn't make it onto the TV much) and that he only played 31 of 66 games in the 3 seasons after he won that Brownlow at 21yo.
 
Last edited:
The way I think of it, how would Dunstall have gone had he played for St Kilda in the mud in the 80's, in a terrible team, with poor delivery and then for us in the 90's and Sydney after that and conversely, how would Lockett have gone had he been getting the lace-out delivery all day long from the likes of Buckenara, Pritchard, Platten, Jarman, etc, in a dominant team, year after year, in his prime years (before injuries started to take a toll)?

Lockett was so good that it didn't really matter how we got it to him, but he still would have gotten more chances and much better delivery had he been playing for Hawthorn instead and as such it blows my mind to think of how many goals he would have kicked in those seasons when Hawthorn dominated, had he been playing for them, like Dunstall was, compared to how many he kicked for us in the mud at Moorabbin and so-on.

It would have also been a hell of a lot harder to double-team Lockett (or for the likes of Monkhurst to drop back into the hole in front of him) had he been playing at the bigger Waverley ground more in the 80's, like Dunstall was. Left one-out, there just would have been no stopping him. He would have just killed them on the lead, in the air, whatever. I genuinely reckon he might have given 2000 career goals a nudge had he been the one recruited by Hawthorn. Injuries (and suspensions) also held him back a considerable amount over the journey.

I think if you asked anyone who played full forward which team they would have preferred to play for, that they would have 100% picked Hawthorn over us and that's because it would have been a much, much easier gig and given them a much greater chance to dominate.

Plugger dominated extraordinarily in spite of playing for us.

and just look at where Tony Lockett dragged us, 94 wooden spoon again, 95 (lockett arrives) 12th, 96 Grand finalist - and continued finals there after.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I'd have to pick Tony Lockett because I had the privilege of seeing him play so many more times than I saw Jason Dunstall play but really they are both great full forwards in vastly different teams. (At least for half of Lockett's career). Would Dunstall have kicked more goals if Hawthorn were not so good and had less routes to goals? Would Lockett have kicked less goals if he'd played in a better team?

IMO they would each kick 200 goals a year if they were playing now given the soft free kicks forwards have gotten in the last few years.

I'd argue Lockett would probably kick about 45 a year... he'd only play 4 games and be suspended for 18
Well, when you had thrown them in a freezer in 1990 until today probably, but more realisticly they woudl have been developed and trained to play todays game and surely would have adapted somehow.
 
Lockett . . . easily.

There's so many ignorant comments in this thread that I'm guessing those that made them never saw them play (I particularly liked the one about Dunstall being better defensively, that gave me a laugh)

Dunstall was a brilliant FF. One of the all time best.

But there's only one Tony Lockett.
 
You have to wonder how many more goals Lockett would have kicked in a team such as Hawthorn during that great era instead of being in such a poorer team like St Kilda for most of his career. My vote goes to Lockett but that is no blight on Dunstall who was a great footballer.
 
I can't argue with your point about the quality of the teams they played in but I will mention one point that should be considered if you believe that.

Lockett 2 B&F
Dunstall 4 B&F (Despite the quality of players he played with)

I love this discussion though, and we can all agree that those of us lucky enough to have seen that era were truly spoiled for great forwards.

Adds an interesting perspective.

For all the "Lockett kicked his goals despite playing with a team of spuds who couldn't put it on a platter for him".....we have the counter that he "only" won 2 B&Fs despite playing with said spuds while Dunstall won 4 B&Fs surrounded by a bunch of superstars. In a team that was the dominant force over a 10 year period, arguably the best of all time, and he was perhaps the best player in that team.

I still give Lockett the nod mind you...........but only just. Any answer that says 'Lockett easily' is mind numbingly dumb.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Lockett for me.. I witnessed him destroy us back in 91 at Moorabbin. The big fella kicked 12 of the best. Needless to say us Crows fans copped it like never before.
 
For all the "Lockett kicked his goals despite playing with a team of spuds who couldn't put it on a platter for him".....we have the counter that he "only" won 2 B&Fs despite playing with said spuds while Dunstall won 4 B&Fs surrounded by a bunch of superstars. In a team that was the dominant force over a 10 year period, arguably the best of all time, and he was perhaps the best player in that team.
Firstly, Lockett didn't play in a team of spuds. He played in some poor teams but lack of talent wasn't the problem with those sides. Lockett in fact was a prime example of that.

Secondly, Dunstall wasn't close to the best player in those Hawthorn teams. He wasn't even the best forward. You are simply highlighting your ignorance (& I'm guessing basing comments on stats rather than actually watching games).

He won B&F's for the same reason Lockett didn't (& a certain CHF that played with Dunstall).

You can be the best without being the fairest.

Dunstall was a true professional in a league still full of amateurs. His professionalism made him the footballer he was - not raw talent. The polar opposite to Lockett.

I still give Lockett the nod mind you...........but only just. Any answer that says 'Lockett easily' is mind numbingly dumb.
Not as dumb as suggesting Dunstall was the best player in those Hawthorn sides.
 
Firstly, Lockett didn't play in a team of spuds. He played in some poor teams but lack of talent wasn't the problem with those sides. Lockett in fact was a prime example of that.

Secondly, Dunstall wasn't close to the best player in those Hawthorn teams. He wasn't even the best forward. You are simply highlighting your ignorance (& I'm guessing basing comments on stats rather than actually watching games).

He won B&F's for the same reason Lockett didn't (& a certain CHF that played with Dunstall).

You can be the best without being the fairest.

Dunstall was a true professional in a league still full of amateurs. His professionalism made him the footballer he was - not raw talent. The polar opposite to Lockett.


Not as dumb as suggesting Dunstall was the best player in those Hawthorn sides.
Who was a better forward than Dunstall in those Hawk teams?
 
Firstly, Lockett didn't play in a team of spuds. He played in some poor teams but lack of talent wasn't the problem with those sides. Lockett in fact was a prime example of that.

Secondly, Dunstall wasn't close to the best player in those Hawthorn teams. He wasn't even the best forward. You are simply highlighting your ignorance (& I'm guessing basing comments on stats rather than actually watching games).

He won B&F's for the same reason Lockett didn't (& a certain CHF that played with Dunstall).

You can be the best without being the fairest.

Dunstall was a true professional in a league still full of amateurs. His professionalism made him the footballer he was - not raw talent. The polar opposite to Lockett.


Not as dumb as suggesting Dunstall was the best player in those Hawthorn sides.

Firstly, I never said he played in a team of spuds.

Secondly, Dunstall most certainly was close to the best player. I said he was perhaps the best, not definitively the best. Possibly the best but close enough to it even if he wasn't.

Thirdly, I went and watched the Hawks every week. I'm not showing ignorance, but you are talking shit.

Considering you earlier laughed at the suggestion that Dunstall was a better defensive player, I'd suggest only one of us is showing ignorance.

:rolleyes: Imagine how stupid your response would have been if I actually had of dared suggest Dunstall was better.....considering I did in fact plump for Lockett.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Locket for mine. He kicked bags despite having a not too shabby footballer in Stewie Lowe parked in front of him at CHF, and a St Kilda side that was awful a lot of the time. But mostly because when he retired, he really retired, no commentator gigs, no media roles, just off back into the obscurity from whence he came.

Locket 1360 @ 4.84 a game. (1360.590 total)
Dunstall 1254 @ 4.66 a game (1254.641 total)

Theres not much in it, but Locket kicked more, more often and more accurately. Lockett 4 Coleman medals with 6 centuries, Dunstall 3 Coleman medals with 6 centuries.

That said one had 559 frees paid against him, and one had 224 frees paid against...hmm i wonder which was which.
 
But mostly because when he retired, he really retired, no commentator gigs, no media roles, just off back into the obscurity from whence he came.

But mostly? Of all the reasons to pick someone..... o_O

What about Dunstall never making a failed comeback once he had retired if we're picking obscure reasons?
 
Both incredible footballers. Dunstall was probably better technically. Even lockett admitted he was just a fat guy who could catch a ball and kick straight.

But you have to go with lockett a, he was an absolute freak. Destroyed everyone and everything that got in his way
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top