Sam Mitchell vs Daniel Harris

[kelman]

Who do you think is better and will be better out of fat arse Sammy Mitchell and Hurricane Harris?

In my opinion (bias included), I think Harris is a fair way ahead after 2004 and that gap will get wider and wider going forward.

They are both great at clearances, the main difference (aside from mitchell's extremely fat arse) is that Mitchell predominantly throws the ball onto his boot to get his clerance, while Harris grabs the ball, evades/breaks tackles and bursts out of the centre square. Harris offers a heap more around the ground than Mitchell and has better delivery.

And before anyone says it, I am happy for anyone to use 2003 as their comparison - the flaws were there then, it is just everyone knows about them now.

Worst Rising Star Winner.....ever


...and don't forget the fat arse.

 

[Firrito24]

Harro by a mile

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Mitchell has more runs on the board, Harro has a bigger scope for improvement.

 

[Scottroo]

Who do you think is better and will be better out of fat arse Sammy Mitchell and Hurricane Harris?

In my opinion (bias included), I think Harris is a fair way ahead after 2004 and that gap will get wider and wider going forward.

They are both great at clearances, the main difference (aside from mitchell's extremely fat arse) is that Mitchell predominantly throws the ball onto his boot to get his clerance, while Harris grabs the ball, evades/breaks tackles and bursts out of the centre square. Harris offers a heap more around the ground than Mitchell and has better delivery.

And before anyone says it, I am happy for anyone to use 2003 as their comparison - the flaws were there then, it is just everyone knows about them now.

Worst Rising Star Winner.....ever


...and don't forget the fat arse.

you have an obsession with his arse

 

[Pessimistic]

And he took his sister to the Brownlow !

 

[year of the roo]

Fooking biased North supporters!!


Harris.

 

[dipper86]

Who do you think is better and will be better out of fat arse Sammy Mitchell and Hurricane Harris?

In my opinion (bias included), I think Harris is a fair way ahead after 2004 and that gap will get wider and wider going forward.

They are both great at clearances, the main difference (aside from mitchell's extremely fat arse) is that Mitchell predominantly throws the ball onto his boot to get his clerance, while Harris grabs the ball, evades/breaks tackles and bursts out of the centre square. Harris offers a heap more around the ground than Mitchell and has better delivery.

And before anyone says it, I am happy for anyone to use 2003 as their comparison - the flaws were there then, it is just everyone knows about them now.

Worst Rising Star Winner.....ever


...and don't forget the fat arse.

well thats a fair comment d*khead, but what you have to really look at is both the midfields, you have a better midfield than ours( Grant, Harvey, Simpson) therefore he was getting the 3rd best player or even not being tagged, At Hawthron this year all we had was Mitchel. Crawford was injured, Vandenberg was suspended, and lekkas was gutless, Therefore mitchell was being tagged by the best tagger and taking on players that were the best in the opposition midfield, and still was getting somewhere near 20 possies a game.

The definition of a clearance is getting the ball out of a congested situation ball ups throw ins and so on, doesnt matter how he does it but he does do it, and he was the number 1 player in 2003 when he had some support from team mates, Harris will get better and be a very good player, but mitchell already has the runs on the board at this present time, who knows in 2 years. ogh yeh and you seem to be talking about his a*se alot, hmm sounds like someone is coming out of the closet. good on ya for having the balls to say it out loud on a big forum like bigfooty, your a brave little boy.

 

[Yze_Magic]

Harris isnt as good all the Kangaroo fans think he is

But I would take him ahead of Mitchell. I shudder at the thought of a former Glenfairy coming to play for the Demons

 

[Sylvia Saint]

And he took his sister to the Brownlow !

Mitchell did?

Talk about a SILF!

 

[feher]

Mitchell by a mile at this stage, last two seasons by Mitchell has avg > 17 possie a game, whereas Harris has 12.4, and 16.6 a game. In fact Mitchell first 3 season's > then Harris first 3 season's

Both are the same age, so I can't see why Mitchell can't keep improving along with Harris.

 

[hilly]

Mitchell by a mile at this stage, last two seasons by Mitchell has avg > 17 possie a game, whereas Harris has 12.4, and 16.6 a game. In fact Mitchell first 3 season's > then Harris first 3 season's

Both are the same age, so I can't see why Mitchell can't keep improving along with Harris.

Where are the stats for game time?

 

[Ausgard]

Difficult to say because Harro doesn't get tagged neally as much as mitchell.

Dipper86 was pretty much spot on - Mitchell was sat on by taggers for most of the season due to injuries to the other Hawthorn Midfielders while I doubt if Harris has ever been tagged - Not with Grant, Simpson and Boomer in the same Midfield.

The one advantage that Mitchell does have is that he has a gun Ruckman feeding him the ball while Harris has to get it himself.

BY the looks of it the Non Hawthorn/North Supporters seem to be siding with Harris so I'll go that way too

 

[Sherrinator]

I'm going mitchell on this one. I get annoyed when players dont automatically clear the ball out of rucks instead of barging through, that is where mitchell beats harris. his spouse is pretty hot too.

 

[feher]

Where are the stats for game time?

And Mitchell plays in a weaker midfield, gets tagged etc it all kind of evens itself out.

 

[Sylvia Saint]

his spouse is pretty hot too.

Did you read Pessimistic's post?

 

[feher]

In my opinion (bias included), I think Harris is a fair way ahead after 2004 and that gap will get wider and wider going forward.

That is funny, I sould have answer this first.

The fact is Mitchell's first 3 season's are better then Harris, even with his limited on field time, perhaps thier is a reason why he has limited onfield time!

Harris has had 1 more season then Mitchell at this stage, Mitchell had a top 2003 season were he rightly so won the rising star, whereas Harris was no where near as good, last season (2004) Mitchell got more of the ball then 2003, and while Harris improved greatly in '04 to '03, he still did not over take Mitchell in terms of avg. disposals.

 

[NIBBLER]

Harris ---> Harris' waddling ass --->DAYLIGHT --->MOONLIGHT ---> Mitchell

 

[hilly]

Feher, I think you need to look at what each player does when they have the ball, not how often they get it.

 

[iameviljez]

Mitchell by a mile. Mitchell got tagged out of 2004, Harris doesn't really have to handle one

 

[year of the roo]

Mitchell by a mile. Mitchell got tagged out of 2004, Harris doesn't really have to handle one

You are going to use him being tagged as an excuse for his poor year???

He wouldn't be the first midfielder to get tagged now, would he?

 

[iameviljez]

You are going to use him being tagged as an excuse for his poor year???

He wouldn't be the first midfielder to get tagged now, would he?

No but 2005 will be Harris' first year of being tagged properly.

 

[feher]

You are going to use him being tagged as an excuse for his poor year???

He wouldn't be the first midfielder to get tagged now, would he?

I don't think Mitchell had a poor year at all, he just wasn't as influential as 2003, and one main reason was, he was our number one midfielder once Crawf went down. Harris still had the likes of Stevens, Simpson taking the presure off him.

Mitchell > Harris

 

[dees_best]

Harris easily in my opinion.

Mitchell is still a gun though.

 

[mjm28]

well thats a fair comment d*khead, but what you have to really look at is both the midfields, you have a better midfield than ours( Grant, Harvey, Simpson) therefore he was getting the 3rd best player or even not being tagged, At Hawthron this year all we had was Mitchel. Crawford was injured, Vandenberg was suspended, and lekkas was gutless, Therefore mitchell was being tagged by the best tagger and taking on players that were the best in the opposition midfield, and still was getting somewhere near 20 possies a game.

The definition of a clearance is getting the ball out of a congested situation ball ups throw ins and so on, doesnt matter how he does it but he does do it, and he was the number 1 player in 2003 when he had some support from team mates, Harris will get better and be a very good player, but mitchell already has the runs on the board at this present time, who knows in 2 years. ogh yeh and you seem to be talking about his a*se alot, hmm sounds like someone is coming out of the closet. good on ya for having the balls to say it out loud on a big forum like bigfooty, your a brave little boy.

Totally agree. This post is full of biased North tools so lets even it up a bit.
Take Mitch by .................. a very long long way over Harris, who may I mention will have a worse year in 2005 just like Mitch did this year.

 

[year of the roo]

Im not sure what harris has accomplished. Mitchell is by far the better player at the moment

Watch him play and then come back and pass judgement.