Jimmy Bartel

[Hodgepodge]

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/afl-round-1-votes-hawthorn-v-geelong.996311/

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...elong-v-north-melbourne.997517/#post-27675489

put in the top 22% of cats players on the ground by about 10% of cats posters. would be surprised if there is one BOG in there..

Again, proving my point. The rhetoric about Bartel just doesn't match the actual opinions on him.

 

[Sttew]

You could say the same about Brent Stanton.

Yeah right.

One of the immutable facts of AFL. Jimmy Bartel has achieved more than any current Hawk player.

 

[BomberClive]

You could say the same about Brent Stanton.

Even as an Essendon supporter i would not compare Stanton to Bartel.

 

[winty]

Yeah right.

One of the immutable facts of AFL. Jimmy Bartel has achieved more than any current Hawk player.

Don't you know Sttew? Apparently Norm Smiths, Brownlows, AA selections and premierships mean nothing. The only award that means something is a club B&F award. It's the only thing every player ever plays for. Oh, they may say they play for premiership glory, but that's a lie. I'm sure Michael Tuck would gladly hand back his 7 premiership medallions tomorrow if it meant he could just lay his hands on one B&F award.

 

[SSSSSS]

He gets better as the game goes on. He doesn't really seem like the player to tear apart the game anymore but the one that can finish it off and seal it once the work has been done. Great player nonetheless, a tad overrated but I think everyone would love his cool head in their team.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Yeah right.

One of the immutable facts of AFL. Jimmy Bartel has achieved more than any current Hawk player.

We're talking about performance though.

Even as an Essendon supporter i would not compare Stanton to Bartel.

Yet they're both first 22 at any club. It doesn't seem to mean a whole lot.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Don't you know Sttew? Apparently Norm Smiths, Brownlows, AA selections and premierships mean nothing. The only award that means something is a club B&F award. It's the only thing every player ever plays for. Oh, they may say they play for premiership glory, but that's a lie. I'm sure Michael Tuck would gladly hand back his 7 premiership medallions tomorrow if it meant he could just lay his hands on one B&F award.

You're simply confusing performance with achievement. So the question of whether Michael Tuck would hand his flags in for a BnF is irrelevant to the better player. Leigh Matthews won 3 fewer flags than Tuck, 8 more BnFs, yet he was by far the better player regardless of whether he would trade one award for the other or not.

 

[dymot]

Cam Mooney has 4 flags. Wayne Carey has two. I know who the better player is.

Cam Mooney has three flags you dopey halfwit.

 

[barmy44]

Again, proving my point. The rhetoric about Bartel just doesn't match the actual opinions on him.

not sure how 'not one out of 140 cats posters rated him BOG in rounds 1 and 2' proves 'he was hailed BOG (or 'superstar') in rounds 1 and 2', but hey...

 

[Hodgepodge]

not sure how 'not one out of 140 cats posters rated him BOG in rounds 1 and 2' proves 'he was hailed BOG (or 'superstar') in rounds 1 and 2', but hey...

It proves the lip service doesn't match the actual rating of the guy.

Kinda like how people tick 'Christian' in the census but don't go to church.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

"Standing up" means more than simply shots on goal, mate. Sewell was a machine that day, you'd be stupid not to admit it.

Standing up means converting your shots when your team needs you to. Bartel had 3 shots on goal in the 2011 grand final, which were all from fairly difficult positions, and two were at times when we really needed them. He nailed all three. That's standing up when your team needs you.

Sure, Sewell was good, but Bartel's performance was the kind of thing that wins you grand finals. Evidently, Sewell's wasn't.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

His ability to lay 11 tackles in the final moments of the game was pretty impressive too. He must have been laying a tackle every 7 seconds or so. What a cameo.

Don't forget the 19 possessions he also got in the dying moments of the game.

 

[barmy44]

It proves the lip service doesn't match the actual rating of the guy.

and you backpedaled.

did everyone hail him the superstar of the first two games as you claimed or not?

also, rounds 1 and 2 of 2013 mean zip in terms of bartels previous accomplishments.

youve made your point anyway. you dont rate bartel. some do, some dont. you dont. you dont have to say as much in every single thread on geelong.

but then again its all about getting the cats posters into a lather for you.

 

[Senatorguesty]

Standing up means converting your shots when your team needs you to. Bartel had 3 shots on goal in the 2011 grand final, which were all from fairly difficult positions, and two were at times when we really needed them. He nailed all three. That's standing up when your team needs you.

Sure, Sewell was good, but Bartel's performance was the kind of thing that wins you grand finals. Evidently, Sewell's wasn't.

Don't forget the effort in 09. Was super and could have kicked the match winner if chappy gave off.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Standing up means converting your shots when your team needs you to..

I know you'd like to boil it down to one aspect of the game, but Sewell's performance was a standout regardless of the fact that he didn't kick any goals.

 

[barmy44]

I know you'd like to boil it down to one aspect of the game, but Sewell's performance was a standout regardless of the fact that he didn't kick any goals.

and yet you gleefully picked bartels one missed shot in the dying minutes as evidence of him being 'non-clutch' in rd 3 last year v north.

Yeah I saw it, was a sitter for Bartel and he choked. Nice clutch work, stalled the Cats just when they were getting into gear

make up your mind.

 

[winty]

You're simply confusing performance with achievement. So the question of whether Michael Tuck would hand his flags in for a BnF is irrelevant to the better player. Leigh Matthews won 3 fewer flags than Tuck, 8 more BnFs, yet he was by far the better player regardless of whether he would trade one award for the other or not.

I'm just going by your logic. According to you, premierships, Norm Smiths and Brownlows mean nothing. Club B&F's are the real measure of how good a player is. Mark Bos won more Geelong B&F's than Matty Scarlett. Must mean Bos is a better player. Liam Pickering is better than Bartel too apparently.

 

[Hodgepodge]

and you backpedaled.

No, it's what I've been saying the whole time. The lip service and the actual rating doesn't match up. Even amongst the fans it seems.

did everyone hail him the superstar of the first two games as you claimed or not?

Haha, what do you think this thread is about?

 

[barmy44]

No, it's what I've been saying the whole time. The lip service and the actual rating doesn't match up. Even amongst the fans it seems.



Haha, what do you think this thread is about?

simple terms: evidence that 'no one rated him BOG' directly contradicts your statement 'everyone rated him BOG'.

 

[barmy44]

bigfooty top 50:

1. ablett - 2763 votes;
40. bartel - 60 votes.

is bartel the most underrated player in the comp today?

criminal underrating.

 

[Hodgepodge]

I'm just going by your logic. According to you, premierships, Norm Smiths and Brownlows mean nothing.

You're just not following my logic. I have never said that those things don't mean anything.

Club B&F's are the real measure of how good a player is. Mark Bos won more Geelong B&F's than Matty Scarlett

You could've picked Gary Ablett with 1 BnF which is a better example since full backs don't traditionally them, and also since Ablett was a better player.

But I also did not argue that we could rank players solely by BnFs, either.

Seems like you're deliberately missing the point, probably due to bias.

I of course have no bias here because

a) I am perfectly willing to rate Geelong players. (Selwood, Hawkins, Ling, Ottens)
and b) I am willing to rate Geelong players who have performed better against Hawthorn, and also performed well in finals against Hawthorn. (Hawkins, Ling, Ottens, Johnson)

 

[sleep]

most complete player in the game.

 

[Hodgepodge]

and yet you gleefully picked bartels one missed shot in the dying minutes as evidence of him being 'non-clutch' in rd 3 last year v north..

Missing a sitter doesn't equate to not scoring in a game, and Sewell completely outperformed Bartel in those respective matches.

 

[barmy44]

Missing a sitter doesn't equate to not scoring in a game, and Sewell completely outperformed Bartel in those respective matches.

the poster originally referred to sewells two fluffed chances in the final 3 minutes.

 

[Collingwood 4 eternity]

Don't you know Sttew? Apparently Norm Smiths, Brownlows, AA selections and premierships mean nothing. The only award that means something is a club B&F award. It's the only thing every player ever plays for. Oh, they may say they play for premiership glory, but that's a lie. I'm sure Michael Tuck would gladly hand back his 7 premiership medallions tomorrow if it meant he could just lay his hands on one B&F award.

You're simply confusing performance with achievement. So the question of whether Michael Tuck would hand his flags in for a BnF is irrelevant to the better player. Leigh Matthews won 3 fewer flags than Tuck, 8 more BnFs, yet he was by far the better player regardless of whether he would trade one award for the other or not.

Jimmy Bartel was on 3aw sports today , this evening.

He accidentally threw out , in the recycling bin , his premiership medals and rings , after he had put them in a rubbish box after moving house recently.

They were found by staff at a recycling centre and returned to Jimmy.

Lucky or what.