- Dec 9, 2015
- 6,492
- 11,294
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Scott Pendlebury - Standing in the game?
- Thread starter Fadge
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Dec 9, 2015
- 6,492
- 11,294
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I'm calling him "Disty" from now on, as he will be a distant memory pretty soon
The likes of JHF, Daics and Harley are light years ahead of Disty at the same stage of his career
On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app
The likes of JHF, Daics and Harley are light years ahead of Disty at the same stage of his career
On SM-A225F using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Thread starter
- #1,303
This is definitely the common view - but as those of us who have watched the great players over multiple decades have always said - the great players generally also have great finals records.
Let's rank each of the finals played by Martin and Pendlebury. You can argue the toss about a particular final being a position or two higher (or lower), but the cold hard facts are - their respective finals performances are distributed quite evenly.
And this is before you take into account that ALL of Martin's best 9 finals were played when he was between 26 and 29 years of age. Conversely, Pendlebury did not play any finals between the ages of 26 and 29 (and played a single final when he was 25).
The analysis is very interesting....
Last edited:
Cleansweep17
Premiership Player
- Dec 20, 2023
- 3,573
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Give me an article saying Pendles is better than Dusty in finals and I’ll take it all back. (Actually even better overall)
I don’t think even you believe that he is better in finals even with your BS Fadge logic which you troll Carlton and Richmond supporters with.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #1,305
What of the above data do you not agree with?
I did the same with Ablett Jnr, and the results were similar - there is very little between Martin's finals performances, and the finals performances of many other greats if the game.
But I'm 'trolling' because I'm presenting facts and figures to highlight that Martin is not as Bradmanesque in finals that many of you guys make him out to be?
Cleansweep17
Premiership Player
- Dec 20, 2023
- 3,573
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Richmond
You are ranking based on your opinion and claiming them as fact because it’s in excel spreadsheet. That’s not the same thing.
Also not bad for an apparent battler…
I think you just WANT him to be bad this season.
- Thread starter
- #1,307
Oh how the mighty have fallen.
Your boy's gone from apparently the most dominant finals performer in the history of the game, to bobbing up on an infographic indicating he has been the 6th best player so far this season for 'percentage of inside 50 kicks retained'...
LOL.
Cleansweep17
Premiership Player
- Dec 20, 2023
- 3,573
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Richmond
At 33 years old in his twilight years being a better inside 50 player than Miers who is considered to be an AA contender because of assists and “bringing teammates into the game”
Also Pendlebury doesn’t seem to be on this list.
Now I get what Carlton supporters are saying. You literally make up what suits you. You got the conclusion first then make up the explanation. It should be the other way around. You even said it yourself.
- Thread starter
- #1,309
Hilarious.
All because of an infographic on the 'Dustin Martin Fans' Instagram page...
Oh boy.
And no, Pendlebury may not be on that page; instead he just orchestrates Grand Final victories 11 games ago with a 12 possession final quarter, continues to be one of his teams best players as a 36 year old, and continues to be one of the best on field leaders the game has seen for a team who is currently rated as second favourites for the premiership.
Meanwhile, Richmond are 17th with a solitary win (a game that Martin didn't even play in) after 10 games and Martin is listed on an infographic about forward 50 entries on a Martin fanboy page.
Hahahaha
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #1,310
I've given you a considerable amount of data in the earlier post - feel free to add to that and update the order based on your perspective if you disagree with the ratings of the finals performances of Pendlebury v. Martin.
Why are we still talking about Martin ? Let's compare Pendlebury to Nick Davis , another medium forward who once carried his team in a final . Without him the Swans aren't premiers in 2005. Nick Davis GOAT?
- Dec 9, 2015
- 6,492
- 11,294
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Cleansweep17
Premiership Player
- Dec 20, 2023
- 3,573
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Dusty gets the top 3 in this order
2017: BOG, BOG, BOG
2020: N/A, BOG, BOG, BOG
2019: BOG, N/A, BOG
Yep 8/10 BOGs (with 100% NS rate, 100% Finals MVP), and it is not my opinion, these are the coaches votes and NS votes. It has never been done before and never will again.
You can squabble over the rest of the series who cares, they mean nothing.
Then Pendles 4th with 2010
I am now expecting a laugh emoji from pies/geelongs supporters, followed by an insult with no rebuttal.
- Dec 9, 2015
- 6,492
- 11,294
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Thread starter
- #1,316
Except.... Pendlebury's 2011 finals series was better than his 2010 finals series, AVERAGING 34 possessions, 5 tackles, 6 inside 50's and 7 clearances.
Is it true that Martin never had 30 possessions in a final?
Pendlebury did. 7 times. Either when he was 24 years of age or younger, or at least 30 years old...
Last edited:
All you prove again is when the snow is soft, Dusty goes ok.
2017 - F1 - 50point win. PF - 40point win. GF - 50point win
2019 - F1 - 60point win. PF - 20point win (Dusty no good) GF - 90point win
2020 - F1 lost (poor game) SF - others better. PF - Nothing special. GF - 30point win - Dusty BOG
2018 - When Richmond needed him to stand up - No where to be seen.
Dustin Martin is a down hill skier of the highest order and should not be brought up in Pendles thread again.
This is a thread to honor two decades of sustained brilliance, not someone lucky enough to be at the right place, whilst a team had a moment of success and five minutes of fame.
mcgrath_truther
AAAAAAAAAAARGH!
all the relevant comparisons between martin & pendlebury begin and end at: what have they done this year.
pendlebury has played in what, all games? give or take one or two, and consistently been a quality performer and has helped build his side onto third on the ladder.
what's dusty done? do nothing special for the team that's 17th on the ladder and lost by 219 points (or so) over the past 2 rounds. i'd take pendles over dusty currently and i think many teams would do the same
pendlebury has played in what, all games? give or take one or two, and consistently been a quality performer and has helped build his side onto third on the ladder.
what's dusty done? do nothing special for the team that's 17th on the ladder and lost by 219 points (or so) over the past 2 rounds. i'd take pendles over dusty currently and i think many teams would do the same
What is the criteria though? If you're not going by already standardized measures and recognized achievements/awards, the data can objectively support a summary of statistical comparisons, but rarely will two people with opposing views/biases be aligned on any subjective interpretations of it.
Especially if the data is being used to present an alternative to official achievements/awards.
3 premierships and 3 Norm Smiths from 3 grand finals is significantly better than 2 premierships from 4 GF years, and 1 Norm Smith from 5 GF matches played, respectively, unless agreeing to an alternative way of measuring. Premierships/norm smiths are tangible, and significantly outweigh any other measures you could assess a player against in terms of finals performances and results.
Not to say there aren't other ways to look at the best performed players in finals across any number of criteria, it's just that it becomes too tribal and bias centric when presented as some kind of counter to a player's record of achievements that are officially recognized as the highest honor possible within the context being argued and without anyone having agreed to the alternative criteria. It doesn't seem authentic or even all that relevant, but more of a futile attempt to convince others to agree to a subjective assessment of statistics hand picked to support a blatantly obvious team based bias.
Last edited:
If the same team played 200 games against the same team on the same ground and with the same conditions with the only difference being that for the first 100 games Pendlebury played in the team and in the second 100 games Martin played I would expect the team with Pendlebury in it to win slightly more games.
However I would expect that for the 100 games the team with Martin in it played that it would be more likely that, at the end of any given game, I’d be saying “Martin was the clear difference in he sides, without him we lose that game.”
This is not to call Martin a show pony - he nothing like that. It’s more to say that his top end can be devastating and can overwhelm teams in a matter of minutes. He reminds me of Carey in that regard - I remember plenty of games in the mid-90s where Carey would decide “Nah - I don’t feel like losing today” and that was it game over.
I’m not sure why people are so caught up in deciding who is better when the two of them play similar positions but coached and directed in systems that look to play them very differently.
Regards
S. Pete
However I would expect that for the 100 games the team with Martin in it played that it would be more likely that, at the end of any given game, I’d be saying “Martin was the clear difference in he sides, without him we lose that game.”
This is not to call Martin a show pony - he nothing like that. It’s more to say that his top end can be devastating and can overwhelm teams in a matter of minutes. He reminds me of Carey in that regard - I remember plenty of games in the mid-90s where Carey would decide “Nah - I don’t feel like losing today” and that was it game over.
I’m not sure why people are so caught up in deciding who is better when the two of them play similar positions but coached and directed in systems that look to play them very differently.
Regards
S. Pete
lol, was surprised after writing all that to see this is a thread about Scott Pendlebury, no idea how it became Dusty vs. Pendles, but at least the page I read was about them.
On topic, Pendles standing in the game can speak for itself from an achievements perspective, and even be compared objectively without need to look any further for data points given how many there are of significance not requiring interpretation.
It was interesting to hear Buckley refer to him as Collingwood's best ever player. I think when you're just talking about player standings at a single club, there's a lot more scope for the subjective and sentimental variables amongst supporters of the club because the conflicting team bias element isn't present, and there is alignment in terms of supporters wanting the same result from every game and season that shapes how they experience watching their team and players, and somewhat calibrates them to the value of a player's most impactful intangibles. Pendles certainly ticks a lot of boxes for pies fans, he's an example of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts when you look at his achievements and general abilities then get the feeling they don't quite add up to how great he's really been when comparing to the other magpies greats, which is not always the case.
Last edited:
You're kidding yourself if you think the team with Pendles would win slightly more, but it is more likely at the end of any given game, you'd be saying Martin was the clear difference. Clearly, the team with Pendles would win moderately more, and there's a higher likelihood at the end of any given game, you'd be saying Martin was the clear difference. To suggest otherwise is utter madness!
Lunchtime
Team Captain
- Mar 23, 2024
- 487
- 699
- AFL Club
- Richmond
What Dusty has achieved in Finals Footy (when it matters most) as you have said in your comment, it might happen again, it just may not happen often, which puts Dusty up there in terms of modern footy.
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Oh, I have an idea.
Cleansweep17
Premiership Player
- Dec 20, 2023
- 3,573
- 1,833
- AFL Club
- Richmond
