Kernahan vs Brereton

[Silvagnis]

If you had to choose one of them at their peak to play for your life the answer is easy.

Brereton.

Kernahan, 7 goals in a thrashing in the 1993 Grand Final and his record is still greater than Brereton's. Kernahan always kicked goals even when he was past it, Brereton stomped on heads and was a joke at the end of his career.

 

[bmwofoz]

Kernahan, 7 goals in a thrashing in the 1993 Grand Final and his record is still greater than Brereton's. Kernahan always kicked goals even when he was past it, Brereton stomped on heads and was a joke at the end of his career.

I remember a great sunny September day in 1984 or 85 when Dermie kicked 8 in a team which was thrashed by the Bombers, o what day

 

[Crow-mo]

Dermie was a better player, sticks had a better, longer career.

not a huge amount in it, both f-off great players.

anyone who says dermie wasn't a great player, must've been another teen/early 20's cretin who thinks stats tell a story.

Sticks also a better leader, mainly because he's one of the great leaders of modern times (maybe the best). That doesn't make him a better CHF though, that was Dermie.

 

[Crow-mo]

I know lots of Carlton types who never even refer to Kernahan from a captaincy standpoint.

carlton types, but not carlton fans. I know absolutely none, not a single one who doesn't refer to his captaincy prowess.

 

[Crow-mo]

As for 87, you can either state that Brereteon was carp on the day or perhaps Rhys-Jones actually played well?

You're right.

1. Rhys-jones was a fantastic player. we shouldn't forget that.
2. he was not a CHB, he played off Dermie. He was a versatile, long, skillful player. he didn't "beat" dermie at all, it was a matchup tactic. He deserved the Norm Smith too.

it was a bit like when Wallet played Rowan Smith on Robran in the 1998 prelim, the idea was to create run from the matchup. It doesn't make Smith a CHB, and even if the tactic had worked that day (it didn't, I think Robran kicked 7) it wouldn't have meant that Smith "beat him".

 

[Crow-mo]

I'm not even sure if you were old enough to be watching football in the 80s, but the simple reality is that Kernahan was a Tredrea style central scoring focus for much of his time at Carlton, whereas Brereton wasn't. If Kernahan had of been in a Hawthorn arrangement with a player like Dunstall at FF he would clearly have kicked less goals over his career and had Brereton been in a Carlton arrangement without Dunstall he would have kicked a lot more. Its not a difficult concept to grasp.

this is also true.

more importantly, Brereton was regarded as the better player at the time. But equally, Kernahan was regarded as an absolute superstar as well.

 

[dipper86]

I remember a great sunny September day in 1984 or 85 when Dermie kicked 8 in a team which was thrashed by the Bombers, o what day

Shut up!

Dermie was great that day though.

 

[Trav 20]

Kernahan, 7 goals in a thrashing in the 1993 Grand Final and his record is still greater than Brereton's. Kernahan always kicked goals even when he was past it, Brereton stomped on heads and was a joke at the end of his career.

Read (re-read) post no. 8 on this thread.

 

[doppleganger]

Brereton's exaggerated reputation often sees him (wrongly) win polls like this.

Kernahan was better.

Kernahan was made captain after only 23 games. He was a leader, a champion and could be relied upon to always kick the important goals, despite his ungainly kicking style. He was consistent year after year. Look at his goal output - always between 60-80 again and again and again. He was hardly ever injured, was remarkably consistent, and rarely played badly.

Dermie even admitted himself he struggled to get motivated against lower teams. Dermie was always injured, always suspended, and was never the kind of player who was going to be a captain like Kernahan. Kernahan captained his club for longer than any man has ever captaiend their club in the VFL-AFL.

Lots of old Carlton people rate Sticks a better captain than Nicholls, and the best captain the Blues have ever had. I wouldn't disagree.

You'd take Kernahan anyday over Brereton. Dermie's reputation (which seems to grow as the years go by) far exceeded his actual output on the field.

but what do the stats say dan??

who had the better percentage!!!

 

[Dan26]

but what do the stats say dan??

who had the better percentage!!!

LOL, LOL ROFLMAO, WTF!!!



Hilarious.

 

[dipper86]

Dermie > Sticks.

 

[Dan26]

Great to see Sticks winning the poll as he thoroughly deserves to.

 

[dipper86]

Great to see Sticks winning the poll as he thoroughly deserves to.

Its great to see that Dermie is ahead of sticks in the best 100 footballers of the century as voted by journalists and x - players.

 

[OneEyedHawk]

Great to see Sticks winning the poll as he thoroughly deserves to.

Great to see Dermie favoured by the Official Top 100 list, as he thoroughly deserves to be.
Slightly more credibility than a slight lead on a Bigfooty poll (involving 50-odd people), where voting is often determined by popularity or team following.

 

[Dan26]

Gee, two Hawks fans think Dermie was better - didnt see that coming!

In virtually every possible way you can measure greatness, Kernahan was better. He played more, he was more reliable, he didn't get injured, he didn't let his team down by getting suspended, he kicked more goals (in crap teams too, such as 1989-1990-1991), he was captain in a record number of games.

That's not to slag off Dermie, but Kernahan was just better. The fact people often rate Dermie higher was mentioned by me in an earlier post. His "reputation" makes him out to be a better player than he was. This happens to most people with a "tough guy" image. Don't get too wound up by reputations - Kernahan was better.

 

[dipper86]

Gee, two Hawks fans think Dermie was better - didnt see that coming!

In virtually every possible way you can measure greatness, Kernahan was better. He played more,he was more reliable, he didn't get injured, he didn't let his team down by getting suspended,

Dermie might have been injured alot more played less games and kicked less goals but that still doesn't change the fact that in there prime Dermie was the greater player, eg: John Coleman, he kicked less goals played less matches was injured and is still regarded as the best full forward to ever play the game.

You don't necessarily have to have played more games kicked more goals to be the better player.

he kicked more goals (in crap teams too, such as 1989-1990-1991),

Yeh but Steve didn't have one of the best full forwards in the history of the game taking goals away from him and pushing him up the ground, When dermie was the soul focus in 85 he kicked 58 goals in his second year of footy at full forward.

he was captain in a record number of games.

Means absolute cr*p, If this was the case Gary Ablett or Leigh Matthews would not be touted the number 1 and 2 best players to ever play the game. There leadership qualities was no where near as impressive as others.

That's not to slag off Dermie, but Kernahan was just better. The fact people often rate Dermie higher was mentioned by me in an earlier post. His "reputation" makes him out to be a better player than he was. This happens to most people with a "tough guy" image. Don't get too wound up by reputations - Kernahan was better.

Once again, What do you mean exaggerated? Kicking 8 goals in a losing grand final, Staying on the ground after sustaining broken ribs and a bruised kidney in the 89 grand final, kicking 11 goals with broken ribs wearing a inflatable vest, single handily distroying Essendon in a final cleaning up Van der har and co, They aren't exaggerated it all happened and they are some of the reasons why he was regarded as one of the best CHF's to ever play the game.


Dermot's flair, matchwinning ability aggression and courage made him the best CHF of that time. He was one of the best and most important players going around in the mid 80's to early 90's.
Not only was Dermott better in the air but was also far superior at ground level, he was the complete player and thats why x players and journalist voted him ahead of sticks in the 100 best footballers of this century.

 

[Crow-mo]

In virtually every possible way you can measure greatness, Kernahan was better.

you forgot, except the way most people judge players. by watching them!

how do you respond to the FACT that when they were playing Dermie was considered the better player, and as someone rightly pointed out, at his peak questions where being asked whether he was possibly the greatest CHF ever?

I know you weren't old enough to remember this, and reading of statistics wouldn't tell you that, but FFS grow up.

 

[Dan26]

you forgot, except the way most people judge players. by watching them!

how do you respond to the FACT that when they were playing Dermie was considered the better player, and as someone rightly pointed out, at his peak questions where being asked whether he was possibly the greatest CHF ever?

I know you weren't old enough to remember this, and reading of statistics wouldn't tell you that, but FFS grow up.

You've got a nasty little habit of questioning peoples opinion based on that persons age, and I havn't said anything until now, but I'm starting to get sick of it.

My football memory goes back to 1981. I first started to really get into it, in around 1983 (grade 2 or 3) where you start to adopt a team, and everyone talks about it in the schoolyard. I also went every week, courtesy of my father and the memories are still vivid. By the time I got to 1984-85, I can remember absolutely vividly. The 1984 GF is still my fondest memory. I remember the brilliance of Leon Baker, the emergence of Salmon, and how he would have "murdered" the ton that year. You'd be surprised the memories one has as a 9 year old and how they carry through to adulthood. Not to mention the dozens of videotapes I've got of past era's.

I remember Brereton starting to emerge in the mid 80's, and I distinctly remember a SOO match between S.A and Vic in 1984 where Kernahan kicked 10 goals, and how all the clubs were chasing him. I remember not being allowed to stay up and watch it (it was on a weeknight), but I snuck up anyway to watch it. Kernahan's and Brereton's careers took place at the very time I was following and understanding football. Kernahan made his debut a massive 5 years after my first memories of football. I'm more than quailified (certainly more so than you) to have an opinion on both of them, and in my view Sticks was the better player.

I certainly don't need my memory questioned by someone who doesn't even know me or my football following history. You'd think I was friggin 13 the way you carry on (I'm 30 if you must know). Kernahan was the better player in my view - he held Carlton's forward line together, and if you disagree that's fine that's your opinion, but don't ever tell me I'm not old enough to remember.

 

[Crow-mo]

You've got a nasty little habit of questioning peoples opinion based on that persons age, and I havn't said anything untul now, but I'm starting to get sick of it.

My football memory goes back to 1981. I first started to really get into it, in around 1983 (grade 2 or 3) where you start to adopt a team, and everyone talks about it in the schoolyard. I also went every week, courtesy of my father and the memories are still vivid. By the time I got to 1984-85, I can remember absolutely vividly. The 1984 GF is still my fondest memory. I remember the brilliance of Leon Baker, the emergence of Salmon, and how he would have "murdered" the ton that year. You'd be surprised the memories one has as a 9 year old and how they carry through to adulthood. Not to mention the dozens of videotapes I've got of past era's.

I remember Brereton starting to emerge in the mid 80's, and I distinctly remember a SOO match betwen S.A and Vic in 1984 where Kernahan kicked 10 goals, and how all the clubs were chasing him. I remember not eing allowed to stay up and watch it, but I snuck up anyway to watch it. Kernahan's and Brereton's careers took place at the very time I was following and understanding football. Kernahan made his debut a massive 6 years after my first memories of football. I'm more than quailified (certainly mroe so than you) to have an opinion on both of them, and in my view Sticks was the better player.

I certainly don't need my memory questioned by someone who doesn't even know me or my football following history. You'd think I was friggin 13 the way you carry on (I'm 30 if you must know). kernahan was the betetr player in my view - he held Carlton's forward line together, and if you disagree thats fine that's your opinion, but don't ever tell me I'm not old enough to remember.

whaaaaah! whaaaaah!

it's good to see that you think if you can remember something, you knew enough to really evaluate it. if you were 13 looking at something, as you were for some of these things, then your opinion is worthless.

Kernahan was an absolute gun, a great, great player. Brereton was considered better at the time, but you obviously weren't old enough to appreciate this.

 

[ALwaysNorth]

This is tough , played same position but different roles .

Kernahan was more important to his team due to no Dunstall at FF.

However even though Sticks was Blues captain , the Derm probably set the tone at Hawthorn more than Sticks at Carlton.

Dermie the Victorian CHF of his generation .

I could argue for both and would have voted a tie if I had that option , great players but both behind Carey,Hart and Robran.

 

[Dan26]

Jesus Christ are you a moron or something? 13 is the first year of high school - usually about 6-7 years after you start to develop memories of football. My memories go back to 1981 and by 84 they are vivid. Do you think 13 year old's are infants or something?

And having seen both players careers in full, and having seen both of them live many times including live at the ground in two losing Grand Finals in which they both dominated, in my view Kernahan was better.

Now you don't have to agree, but at 30 years old, I'm more than qualified. Are you from S.A? if so what the hell would you know know about Victorian football the mid 80's? I followed it every week, from 1981 to now. Bit hard to miss Brereton in the mid 80's... even more so if you're an Essendon fan. One retired when I was 22, the other when I was 20. Remember both of them absolutely vividly. You carry on like they played in the 70's.

Obviously you only started to remember things at 25. I remember Kernahan before he even came into the VFL. God I remember his first "big" game for the Blues on Anzac Day at Waverley in '86 when they rolled us.

But, since you started remembering things at 25, you wouldnt be aware. You're just looking for an "excuse" to say that Brereton was better. As my reasons for Kernahan being better are well said, thoughtful, and correct, you have to make up excuses.

Idiot. What would you know anyway? What possible knowledge would you have of the two players?

 

[doppleganger]

LOL, LOL ROFLMAO, WTF!!!



Hilarious.

sort of agree with u on this one dan, but...........

Would pick dermott as he was the better collingwood player!!!

 

[Crow-mo]

Jesus Christ are you a moron or something? 13 is the first year of high school - usually about 6-7 years after you start to develop memories of football. My memories go back to 1981 and by 84 they are vivid. Do you think 13 year old's are infants or something?

And having seen both players careers in full, and having seen both of them live many times including live at the ground in two losing Grand Finals in which they both dominated, in my view Kernahan was better.

Now you don't have to agree, but at 30 years old, I'm more than qualified. Are you from S.A? if so what the hell would you know know about Victorian football the mid 80's? I followed it every week, from 1981 to now. Bit hard to miss Brereton in the mid 80's... even more so if you're an Essendon fan. One retired when I was 22, the other when I was 20. Remember both of them absolutely vividly. You carry on like they played in the 70's.

Obviously you only started to remember things at 25. I remember Kernahan before he even came into the VFL. God I remember his first "big" game for the Blues on Anzac Day at Waverley in '86 when they rolled us.

But, since you started remembering things at 25, you wouldnt be aware. You're just looking for an "excuse" to say that Brereton was better. As my reasons for Kernahan being better are well said, thoughtful, and correct, you have to make up excuses.

Idiot. What would you know anyway? What possible knowledge would you have of the two players?

have a cry you big sook.

btw I don't care what you thought about Leon Baker when you were 9 either.

 

[0-xXx-0]

Brereton's exaggerated reputation often sees him (wrongly) win polls like this.

Kernahan was better.

Kernahan was made captain after only 23 games. He was a leader, a champion and could be relied upon to always kick the important goals, despite his ungainly kicking style. He was consistent year after year. Look at his goal output - always between 60-80 again and again and again. He was hardly ever injured, was remarkably consistent, and rarely played badly.

Dermie even admitted himself he struggled to get motivated against lower teams. Dermie was always injured, always suspended, and was never the kind of player who was going to be a captain like Kernahan. Kernahan captained his club for longer than any man has ever captaiend their club in the VFL-AFL.

Lots of old Carlton people rate Sticks a better captain than Nicholls, and the best captain the Blues have ever had. I wouldn't disagree.

You'd take Kernahan anyday over Brereton. Dermie's reputation (which seems to grow as the years go by) far exceeded his actual output on the field.

could not have said it better myself

btw the hawks carried dernie, the most overrated boof head of all time

 

[Choota]

If your side was playing in a grand final tomorrow, who would you rather?Brereton.

But if you were going to build a team around someone for the next decade, who would you choose? Kernahan.

Sticks was a great of the game and had the longer career than Brereton (largely due to Derm's style of play). But if you were going into a big game and both were fit and firing, you'd take Brereton any day of the week. Difficult to give a definitive answer because of their differences but ultimately they played in strong teams during the same era. I would not have swapped Brereton for Kernahan.