Pendles is a better player than Danger - what do you think (poll added)

Which player is better, Scott Pendlebury or Patrick Dangerfield

  • S Pendlebury

    Votes: 150 74.6%

  • P Dangerfield

    Votes: 51 25.4%
  • Total voters
    201
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Dangerfield is 1 All Australian off the record, pretty damn consistent. More than Fyfe and Martin combined, who he's often compared to.

Think i'd go Pendlebury over their careers but Dangerfield on their best days.
 
Different players.
One can push forward and kick you goals while the other can play at half back flank (McLeod) and then move into the middle and dominate a game.
If you had to pick one for a do or die final, no doubt you pick Pendlebury just as you would take Selwood over Dangerfield for a final as that is often when the best skilled player win you the games.
 
Swerving Irv said:
Dangerfield, every day of the week. Carried Adelaide's midfield for a long time, even when they were ordinary. Pendlebury's always been surrounded by a good midfield brigade, from the start of his career. Always had the likes of Swan, Sidebottom, Beams, Adams, Treloar etc around.

Dangerfield could capably play full forward for a season and kick 60 goals, he's that good. Brilliant mark, penetrating kick on either foot and explosive. Pendlebury can't do that. Not to say that Pendlebury's not a champion, of course he is. But he ain't Dangerfield.
Click to expand...
First of all I think you under-rated the Adelaide midfield over the years Dangerfield was there.
And maybe Pendlebury made the midfielders around him better players. I don't think Dangerfield makes those around him better players at all. No doubt he is a great player, and I think even if Pendles played forward he wouldn't be as effective as Dangerfield. But as a midfielder who is smooth, dangerous with the ball and seems to get the team into an attacking position with his kicking/handballing, I think he more than makes up for it.

Danger may be a better forward, but Pendles is a better midfielder.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Pendlebury is a more enjoyable player to watch because of the way he moves and thinks with ball in hand. Dangerfield is an excitement machine but there's an elegance in Pendlebury that you don't see in many players.

I grew up a soccer fan and Pendles is a George Best/Trevor Brooking/Paul Scholes type; not many of them come along & you treasure them when they do. Dangerfield is a flashy johnny whirley.
 
Dancing Dougy said:
Over the test of time, Pendlebury has proven to be the better player. Has more impact, brings more players into the game and has better/smarter disposal. If the two were lined up in the school yard, Pendlebury would be picked every time. Dangerfield is a good player and can be very damaging, but I don’t feel his impact is felt on a scale that Pendlebury’s is.
Click to expand...
LOL.
 
Billys Back said:
Danger may be a better forward, but Pendles is a better midfielder.
Click to expand...
This is why BF shits me. Anal polls and futile discussion. Why are we comparing chalk with cheese?
 
When the game is on the line, Danger every time. I hate Geelong, and I hate Danger, and he can't kick, but geez he goes harder than any other elite player in the league, and gets dirty in and under.

Pendles seems a bit too focused on looking like he is not trying, like he feels he needs to maintain his make-time-stand-still image, great to watch of course, but he does come across as a bit of a clean-knees.

I think you saw that when he fluffed the 2019 prelim for the Pies, getting sold candy by Mummy of all people. You can see Pendles went for the 'basketball wizardry' thing again, trying to pinch the ball cleanly and goal, when footy 101 says you target Mummies body and made the tackle stick.

I do respect that Danger can leave that image stuff behind on-field and go nuts in and under, as well as do the flashy stuff on the outside.

Muuuuuuch prefer Pendles to Danger off-field though. Can't stand Danger's media persona.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Pendles is overall the better player- more efficient, selfless, consistent and poetry in motion to watch.
Danger is a beast- have watched him drag cats over the line off his own back at least 5 times in the last year- they would be lost without him.

Take Pendles out of pies and they are still a very good team
Take Danger out of cats and they are rubbish.

That said- Danger is selfish and always seems to berate teammates and can imagine hime being a polarising figure in the clubrooms.

Pendles is all class and would be a deserved Brownlow winner (unless Nat can come back soon!!)
 
Pendlebury is not as skilled a footballer as Dangerfield - that is straightforward. If they were at one end in kick to kick, Dangerfield would dominate because his raw football skills are at the very top end of elite.

There is possibly an argument that Pendlebury is a more effective footballer than Dangerfield - he is more precise and I personally think fits into a team game plan better than Danger but ultimately Danger is the more likely of the two to completely dominate a quarter or game.
 
Collingwoodity said:
That's a bit narrow-minded:

Goal assists :
Pendlebury - 221
Dangerfield - 157

Clangers :
Pendlebury - 678
Dangerfield - 848

"Just as food for thought though, I will say that Danger has 170 more clangers than Pendles in 53 less games."
Click to expand...
It is easy to cherry pick stats because they are different types of midfielders


Goals:
Pendlebury - 178
Dangerfield - 287

Clearances:
Pendlebury - 1147
Dangerfield - 1349

Inside 50s:
Pendlebury - 950
Dangerfield - 1186

Contested Possessions:
Pendlebury - 3317
Dangerfield - 3474

Farang83150 said:
Dangerfield has it all over Pendles in one area, he dives and since rance retired he's the king of it...

Click to expand...

You support the only club in recent memory that has won a final because of a dive
 
Ricmel said:
Pendlebury is not as skilled a footballer as Dangerfield - that is straightforward. If they were at one end in kick to kick, Dangerfield would dominate because his raw football skills are at the very top end of elite.

There is possibly an argument that Pendlebury is a more effective footballer than Dangerfield - he is more precise and I personally think fits into a team game plan better than Danger but ultimately Danger is the more likely of the two to completely dominate a quarter or game.
Click to expand...
Pendles not as skilled? Lol No doubt Danger is a better athlete but his ball use ie skills are sub par. He just dumps it down the line or handballs to a bloke under more pressure
 
Ricmel said:
Pendlebury is not as skilled a footballer as Dangerfield - that is straightforward. If they were at one end in kick to kick, Dangerfield would dominate because his raw football skills are at the very top end of elite.

There is possibly an argument that Pendlebury is a more effective footballer than Dangerfield - he is more precise and I personally think fits into a team game plan better than Danger but ultimately Danger is the more likely of the two to completely dominate a quarter or game.
Click to expand...

Not as skilled? Straightforward?

What?
 
Lenny2020 said:
Not as skilled? Straightforward?

What?
Click to expand...

I think when people think skill in football, they think kicking and nothing else.
Using that metric, Josh Hunt was the most skilful player in our flag teams.

skills in afl is more than kicking precisely.

tackling
Breaking tackles
Marking
Clearing the ball
Rucking
Kicking for goal on the run
Kicking for goal from a set shot
Handballing
Handballing in traffic and in a stoppage

Undoubtedly Pendlebury is a better kick and has ‘classier’ disposal.

does that make him more skilful?
Well he’s behind dangerfield for breaking tackles, sticking big tackles, marking, running, kicking goals (I recognise he’s probably more accurate but that doesn’t make him better at finding goals).

so generically claiming Pendlebury is more skilful is a bit misleading
 
PhatBoy said:
I think when people think skill in football, they think kicking and nothing else.
Using that metric, Josh Hunt was the most skilful player in our flag teams.

skills in afl is more than kicking precisely.

tackling
Breaking tackles
Marking
Clearing the ball
Rucking
Kicking for goal on the run
Kicking for goal from a set shot
Handballing
Handballing in traffic and in a stoppage

Undoubtedly Pendlebury is a better kick and has ‘classier’ disposal.

does that make him more skilful?
Well he’s behind dangerfield for breaking tackles, sticking big tackles, marking, running, kicking goals (I recognise he’s probably more accurate but that doesn’t make him better at finding goals).

so generically claiming Pendlebury is more skilful is a bit misleading
Click to expand...

But I don’t see how it’s straightforward either way when including everything. Pendlebury has him covered and by some margin for kicking and hand balling. Danger has marking and goal kicking and a few other things. But for me skills are mostly kicking and hand balling and it’s not a contest there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Connar
Who here thinks Fremantle AFLW Team will be better than Men over next five years?
Replies
3
Views
223
Randomizor
Randomizor
L
Player Watch Is Danger a danger to others?
Replies
8
Views
406
STPer18
STPer18
Cleansweep17
Opinion What best describes your fav 3 players from your club?
Replies
0
Views
221
Cleansweep17
Cleansweep17
STRONGandBALD
  • Poll
NEUTRALS who is a better player?
2 3 4 5
Replies
106
Views
3K
PerthBoy86
PerthBoy86
Coolangatta
Fixture A better way to do double-ups
Replies
5
Views
481
esoteric
E
blackshadow
Rumour Trouble at Brisbane? Do NOT Name Names, Thank You - BF Admin
18 19 20 21 22
Replies
530
Views
62K
jc12
jc12
Lingsface
Do trial players get wages?
Replies
2
Views
406
Lingsface
Lingsface
Back
Top