Macca or Roo?

[jo172]

You can't be wrong with a subjective opinion.

You can if it's irrational, so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have formed it or not based on evidence.

 

[Slippery Pete]

You can if it's irrational, so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have formed it or not based on evidence.

Agree.

This thread is like asking a parent to chose between two of their kids.

One other thing to consider. I don't think the Crows have ever missed a player like we missed Ricciuto in the 2005 Qualifying Final and the 2006 Preliminary Final. Those two games were the most costly losses in the history of the AFC.

There's virtually no doubt in my mind we would have won both those games if Ricciuto had played.

Roo's absence left a hole in the team that we could never fill. Some would argue we still haven't filled it.

 

[Allefgib]

Wasn't Macca only just back from bursitis injury in '06 as well? Who knows his influence if coming in fit and in form....

 

[Slippery Pete]

Wasn't Macca only just back from bursitis injury in '06 as well? Who knows his influence if coming in fit and in form....

Stop it, you are giving me nightmares.

That last 8 or so weeks of 2006 still makes me feel sick.

 

[jenny61_99]

You can if it's irrational, so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have formed it or not based on evidence.

That's bollocks. Based on evidence according to whom? Everybody comes to their own conclusion (hence the use of the term subjective) based on evidence that is important to them. If, for example, you valued hardness at the ball, or great leadership as important factors to determine "greatness", then you'd choose Roo every day. But if you value silky skills or a freakish ability to pull magic out of a hat to determine "greatness", you can't possibly go past McLeod. In MY BOOK, the skills and freak of McLeod were far more entertaining and to me far more valuable, than the bullocking and leadership work of Roo. Would I be without Roo? No bloody fear. But if forced to choose between the two, Andrew McLeod's magic wins hands down.

Like I said, I appreciate that others have a differing view point.

 

[Slippery Pete]

If, for example, you valued hardness at the ball, or great leadership as important factors to determine "greatness", then you'd choose Roo every day.

Re skills - Roo was the best set shot we've ever had outside Darren Jarman.

Roo's hands were unbelievable.

McLeod was better on his wrong side and yes, more freakish.

Roo could also go to full forward and beat defenders who were a good 3or 4 inches taller than him. (he was only 6 foot in the old money).

Roo was a freak in his own way, just not silky like Macca.

 

[srv23]

When our team needed it Macca could do the magical, Roo could do the mercurial.

I'd probably say Roo just but it's virtually impossible to split. I'm just honoured to have had the oppurtunity to watch both these champions play for the team I love over the last 20 years.

 

[jo172]

That's bollocks. Based on evidence according to whom? Everybody comes to their own conclusion (hence the use of the term subjective) based on evidence that is important to them. If, for example, you valued hardness at the ball, or great leadership as important factors to determine "greatness", then you'd choose Roo every day. But if you value silky skills or a freakish ability to pull magic out of a hat to determine "greatness", you can't possibly go past McLeod. In MY BOOK, the skills and freak of McLeod were far more entertaining and to me far more valuable, than the bullocking and leadership work of Roo. Would I be without Roo? No bloody fear. But if forced to choose between the two, Andrew McLeod's magic wins hands down.

Like I said, I appreciate that others have a differing view point.

I could subjectively say that Mathew Smith was better than Roo and Mcleod.

I would be wrong.

I didn't mention anything regarding Roo or Mcleod.

Do you get along well with Mantis?

 

[kulak]

As a footnote, i cant help but dwell on the fact that from 1999 onwards, we had a combination of great and elite midfielders still young and coming into their prime, yet we were unable to win another premiership (let alone a prelim final!).

Indeed

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

How the HELL can I be wrong about this? It's a subjective question, and that's my reply. Macca has been and always will be the better player of the two in my eyes. I've explained why. I appreciate you see it differently, it would be nice if you could reciprocate.

I've gone back and done some reading to try and understand your point of view as i find it hard to see where you are coming from but this comment is not subjective, its a bias point of view.

You don't like Mark Ricciuto and you have said that before, so it isn't subjective - its personal.

for the record, i would say between 1997 and 1999 Mark Ricciuto easy, 2000 - 2002 Andrew McLeod and then between 2003 and 2005 would be the years Mark Ricciuto dominated again, leaving 2006 to 2008 as Andrew McLeod years

I guess because Mark Ricciuto shaded Andrew McLeod during the premiership years and the early NC era would give it to Roo - but it would be just.

 

[Southerntakeover]

You can if it's irrational, so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have formed it or not based on evidence.

Listen bloke, i dont come on here to read about the 'reasonable person' test. Stop that immediately.

 

[RoosterLad]

I'd pick McLeod but would prefer Darren Jarman.

 

[aneale]

McLeod has been one of my most watched - and favourite players - since I started watching footy in 1995, but I think you're absolutely blind!

enough said. Anyone who puts McLeod in the same sentence as Peter Bell is clearly just a League supporter with NFI. I do apologise for referencing Mark Browning in my post ... you clearly would have no idea who he is.

 

[SouthSwans]

enough said. Anyone who puts McLeod in the same sentence as Peter Bell is clearly just a League supporter with NFI. I do apologise for referencing Mark Browning in my post ... you clearly would have no idea who he is.

No need to be a tool.

I've been to one game of league in my life and of course I know who Mark Browning is, gee there's a lot of tossers on BigFooty .

Sorry for having an opinion.

 

[jenny61_99]

I've gone back and done some reading to try and understand your point of view as i find it hard to see where you are coming from but this comment is not subjective, its a bias point of view.

You don't like Mark Ricciuto and you have said that before, so it isn't subjective - its personal.

for the record, i would say between 1997 and 1999 Mark Ricciuto easy, 2000 - 2002 Andrew McLeod and then between 2003 and 2005 would be the years Mark Ricciuto dominated again, leaving 2006 to 2008 as Andrew McLeod years

I guess because Mark Ricciuto shaded Andrew McLeod during the premiership years and the early NC era would give it to Roo - but it would be just.

I appreciate, and am flattered by your interest.

I stated ALL along that this was my subjective opinion. I don't rate Roo highly as a person - for personal reasons, but I have ALWAYS said he was a brilliant footballer (you would have seen that if you looked at past posts). Just because some people may be unable to separate the two doesn't mean I can't, and I resent the suggestion that this is the case.

By the way: Definition of Subjective: taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias; "a subjective judgment" . If an opinion is based on incorrect or unfounded factual evidence, then yes it is wrong, however my opinion is not based on incorrect or unfounded factual evidence at all. You all agree Macca is a freakish player with silky skills so I haven't based my opinion on incorrect facts or unfounded evidence.

IMO - this makes him the better player of the two. A subjective statement based on those things that I value more highly in a footballer. I can't understand all the fuss - I rate Roo extremely highly - #2 - as many others have done.

 

[glengowan]

Riccuito. He is clearly the number 1 Crow in my opinion. Never shirked a contest, unlike McLeod.

 

[BunjiMac]

Roo is a stronger tougher player, a better mark and a longer kick and makes people around him better through his presence and leadership. Roo could change a game through sheer brute force. Roo epitomizes what is tough, strong and courageous about our game.

McLeod has better disposal, is quicker, better decision maker, better big game player and made players around him better through his class, sublime skills and ability to make the right decision under immense pressure. Mcleod could change a game through freakish athleticism and outright talent. McLeod epitomizes what is athletic, skillful and beautiful about our game.

You can argue their individual abilities forever, but I think McLeod for me. I think out of all the players at the AFC, he has brought the most new fans to the club and to footy in general, purely through the eye-catching way in which he plays and the class with which he conducts himself.

 

[turbo182]

Personalyl I think Mcleod is the best AFC player of all time, but was intrigued to see who was in front. MY pick of Mcleod made it 26 apiece

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Ricciuto by a nose for me.

McLeod in his prime I think was a better player however Roo managed to maintain the contested edge to his game for longer and therefore was the more influential.

 

[jo172]

36 all, probably a fair reflection tbh.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I appreciate, and am flattered by your interest.

What was that about not being condescending or patronizing?

 

[jo172]

Listen bloke, i dont come on here to read about the 'reasonable person' test. Stop that immediately.

I realise BF is where we come to escape from reasonable persons (of all degrees)

 

[Gary17]

36 all, probably a fair reflection tbh.

This poll is much closer and far more interesting than the election one!

 

[The Karma Bus]

I think people claiming that McLeod singlehandedly could win games for us are also forgetting the games when Roo saved our backside.
I get the feeling that a lot of people have forgotten just how great a player Roo was. He has been retired for a few years and we have been seeing McLeod's magic for a few years since then.

Roo was just as much of a match winner as McLeod but maybe in a less flashy way! McLeod was just silky skilled who at times appeared to float over the surface. He is one of the smoothest players to ever play the game. Roo was as big a gun but in a different sort of way.

Who could forget for one, that game against Carlton at Cardboard Park.. How many times he saved our beehinds.. People forget.. I want a dvd on both of them..

That game at Optus Oval when we started the year 0-3 in a torrential downpour and thunder was one of the all time great leadership games!

First he comes out and flattens Matthew Lappin with a hip and shoulder, then he just slams Lance Whitnall into the ground and single handedly drags us over the line. That was just a classic Roo game.

Yeah as memories fade and time passes, some people forget just how influential some players were..

And i still remember this goal so vividly as i watching that game we mentioned..

[YOUTUBE]e2hs7OtMfmE[/YOUTUBE]

 

[jenny61_99]

What was that about not being condescending or patronizing?

Well I mean seriously... you bothered to look up past posts??

Notice you haven't commented on the rest of my post.