SOS vs Scarlett

[matt decat]

Which do you believe is the better full back?

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23701121-19742,00.html

IS MATTHEW Scarlett the best full-back of the last 20 years, if not ever?
What a question and virtually impossible to answer.
It's difficult to take players of different eras, say South Melbourne's Fred Goldsmith with the prince of full-backs Jack Regan, and compare their worth to Carlton's Stephen Silvagni and even St Kilda's pillar Max Hudghton, because the game evolves so quickly.
Indeed, it's ridiculous.
If you were to pluck Scarlett from today and transport him back to 1955, when Freddy Goldsmith won the Brownlow Medal - the only one ever by a full-back - I'm tipping Scarlett would've got 22 three votes.
And if we can continue the ridiculousness, Scarlett would not have been playing full-back, anyway.
He would have been a dominating midfielder or running centre half-forward, and pity the poor bugger trying to keep up with him.
So cross-generation is not my go.
In my opinion, Scarlett is the most complete full-back I have seen and played against.
His attributes make him the standout; he beats his man in the air, he marks one-on-one, he's sensational on the deck, has clean hands when he gathers the ball and runs it out of defence.
Scarlett has been able to develop a peerless one-two combination coming out of defence.
That means he runs with the ball, handballs to a stationary teammate (which was once a big no-no in footy) and then receives it back, runs through centre half-back and then pinpoints a pass to a midfield teammate.
If I was coaching against Geelong, one of my first instructions to my players would be to hit Scarlett, take him out of the contest, so he does not get the return handball.
Still, no one has been able to do it. Scarlett is so nimble on his feet, not many forwards can keep up with him on the rebound.
What makes him the best is he plays in a pro-active mode. It's like he's the full-forward. Have you noticed how many times he marks in front of his opponent?
He reacts so quickly to the bloke who has the footy, his reading of the play is second to none as a defender.
Geelong coach Mark Thompson is blessed. Every week, with an empty magnet board in front of him, Bomber simply has to throw Scarlett's name at full-back and be confident Scarlett will win his position 95 per cent of the time.
What a luxury. And, meanwhile, the other coaches in the league are spending their days trying to work out who and how many players are going to play on Buddy Franklin.
Like everyone else, I can't wait for the Round 17 clash between the Cats and Hawks.

Already, it brings back memories of the Wayne Carey-Glen Jakovich days.
This, of course, is not about denigrating the great Stephen Silvagni, who was named full-back of the century ahead of blokes like David Dench, Goldsmith, Chris Langford and Kelvin Moore.
SOS was a star, an amazing player. I love him. And he played in an era when the full-forwards had one thing in common: brilliance.
They came in all shapes and sizes too: Tony Lockett, Jason Dunstall, Gary Ablett, Carey, Tony Modra, John Longmire, Matthew Lloyd, Matthew Richardson and Rocca S.
Indeed, he played on nine of the top 25 goalkickers of all time.
He was a champ, no doubt. He could spoil like no other, mark, use his body and hands and had superb footy nous and timing.

And when the Blues needed a lift, they would send him forward to kick goals.
Speaking of hands, what makes defending so different these days to the past, is that you can't use them.
SOS was the master at scragging, pushing his opponent under the ball, hitting his opponent's arms and using his hands on his opponent's back to hold his position.
And because the game was more physical during the late '80s and early to mid-'90s, it allowed SOS to crash into opponents, which today would be deemed a free kick.
Had you taken these weapons out of his armoury could he have adjusted like Scarlett has?
We will never know, but one thing is for sure, in 2020 we will be comparing Scarlett to the next gun full-back and debating whether he could have adjusted to the 2020 game.
Scarlett in 2008 vs SOS, to me, equals Scarlett by a nose.

 

[FevolasFox]

Being on the Carlton board everyone is going to pick SOS.

Post the same poll on the Geelong board and see how the results differ.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I have no issue with this story. Scarlett is right up there with SOS IMO and it is semantics to argue who is better. SOS has the advantage of being versatile in that he could play full forward. Scarlett has the advantage in pace and off the ground. SOS may have adjusted to the current rules, in fact I am sure he would. It may have made him more human however.

 

[Marc Shmurf 3]

W. Carey, G. Ablett snr, T. Locket, J. Dunstall, A. Lynch, G. Lyon, S. Rocca, T. Modra, P. Sumich>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> B. Fevola, D. Bradshaw, F. Gehrig, A. Rocca, J. Roughead, J. Westoff, T. Hawkins, N. Thompson, Q, Lynch

Richo, Lloyd dont count as both players have played on them.

Massive class difference that SOS had to contain. SOS would have not have even bothered turning up against some of the players Scarlett has to contend with. Not talking anything away from Scarlett as he is a gun, but comparing the 2 in this way heavily turns it SOS's way.

 

[THEBLOODS85]

sos played on nine of the best 25 goalkickers ever in his time........lockett, ablett, carey, llyod, richardson, dunstall, modra, sumich, longmire......fair line-up and not many of that calibre around today.

....but they are two different types of defenders as well, who adapted to the rules that governed the way they could play......hence why sos could be more physical......Scarlett is more an attacking defender, who yes blankets his opponent and then runs off.

One thing sos had in his arsenal was the ability to go forward......no mug kicks over 200 goals in a career as a forward, let alone when they are regarded as one of the best defenders ever.

Both are fantastic exponents of defensive work, both in crossing-over eras and to separate them is merely denegrating one or the other.....which neither deserve!
__________________

 

[thylacine60]

Probably only matters in the area of versatility but SOS also kicked 200 goals.

 

[blues4flag]

Both the premier full backs of their time. Hard to compare, as they played in different eras, but I'd have to choose SOs. As others said, played on some of the best forwards in the history of the game, was able to go up forward and impact a game. Scarlett is brilliant - excellent reader of the play and his run out of defence for a full back is second to none. Doesn't play on the opposition's best week in, week out - but when he does he's very hard to beat.

 

[Enso]

Dont get me wrong, Scarlett is awesome and clearly the best full back in the comp

But

Good teams in modern day football support their fullbacks alot more than in SOS's day.
You now see a greater emphasis on - Defesive pressure in the midfield,
Flooding, and Tempo football, allowing teams to take the pressure off the backline when they need to.

 

[Thrawn]

Christ almighty, did people have a memory wipe recently that wiped out their entire memories of the 90s?

As good as Scarlett is, he is no Silvagni.

I have seen defensive efforts from SOS that Scarlett would have trouble doing - for example, Silvagni was the master of the last second spoil, even when the ball was at his opponent's chest a mile in front of him. Some of the spoils he would do were amazing, and incredibly freaky. You would always shake your head and go "how the hell did he get to that?" This sort of stuff was his artfor mand he would do it week in, week out - and no other FB would come close. Not to mention that he was a better mark - especially in contested situations. If you compare how many contested marks the two players would get 1v1, SOS would be in the lead. And this is against guys who were far superior aerialists than the current patch - guys like Carey, Ablett and Lockett. He was also fantastic 1v1 - perhaps arguably better than Scarlett.

The only thing Scarlett has over SOS is his kicking skills and his rebound from 50 - he did it more often than SOS and was more fluent, but somehow this made the misconception that SOS never made attacking runs himself, which I found quite absurd. Silvagni had quite the tank (no pun intended), and had the fitness and the pace to actually lead up a little into the midfield and he actually did those things, despite the comments from Geelong supporters.

Comparatively, here is what both FBs had to contend with:

Bolded: Silvagni's opponents
Italicised: Scarlett's opponents
Underlined: Both their opponents

1,360 Tony Lockett
1,299 Gordon Coventry
1,254 Jason Dunstall
1,057 Doug Wade
1,030 Gary Ablett
970 Jack Titus
915 Leigh Matthews
874 Peter McKenna
839 Matthew Lloyd
817 Bernie Quinlan
778 Kevin Bartlett
758 Matthew Richardson
748 Saverio Rocca
738 Stephen Kernahan
735 Bill Mohr
727 Peter Hudson
727 Wayne Carey
722 Harry Vallence
707 Dick Lee
681 Bob Pratt
662 Jack Moriarty
633 Alistair Lynch
630 David Neitz
629 Michael Moncrieff
607 Michael Roach
594 Stewart Loewe
593 Kelvin Templeton
588 Tony Modra
575 Simon Beasley
575 Simon Madden
574 Richard Osborne
572 Norm Smith
561 Paul Salmon
554 Chris Grant
549 Peter Daicos
548 Dick Harris
540 Lindsay White
540 Fraser Gehrig
539 Barry Hall
537 John Coleman
527 Brian Taylor
514 Peter Sumich
511 John Longmire

Not to mention the discrepancy between AA jumpers - SOS 7 as opposed to Scarlett's 3. If not anything else, this shows that Silvagni had been dominant in his position for a much longer period of time - also in an era where arguably there were better FBs running around so it's not like he was the only good one out there. He was also a more versatile player, who could kick bags of goals for you.

Should I not mention Silvagni's '95 finals series where he kept all of Carey, White and Ablett to a combined total of one goal? Has Scarlett done anything that impressive? Ever?

Some people seem to think Scarlett is better because of his run from FB alone. They forget that the prime job for a FB is to stop his opponent from kicking goals and having an influence on a game... and SOS was better than him at doing that, on far superior opponents. Everything is secondary and merely a bonus - if you want to discuss run from D50, then that is what CHB and HBFs do more often than not because their positions allow more freedom to do that.

As for the scragging issue, pay no attention to that. Defenders scrag all the time, even today. How many times have we seen Scarlett scrag Fevola for example? Yes, that's right - many times. Yet some Geelong supporters would some believe that the scragging SOS did meant he was an inferior FB. Quoting the different rules and using them as a basis to argue who was better is incredibly foolish - you can only compare players by what they did, what they achieved. By their respective strengths and weaknesses... things that they can use in any era.

 

[Charbzilla]

When scarlett can play Full Forward and kick 10 goals on the next best defender in the comp, then he is about even with SOS. i.e. never

 

[Charbzilla]

And if we can continue the ridiculousness

nuff Said

 

[magpies10]

When scarlett can play Full Forward and kick 10 goals on the next best defender in the comp, then he is about even with SOS. i.e. never

Funny how the thread asks who is the better full back.

 

[Thrawn]

Funny how the thread asks who is the better full back.

A lot of the time SOS would kick goals, running from FB. He would bob up and kick a few, time and time again - but he would always go back and mind his opponent. While people masturbate over Scarlett's attacking run and offensive rebound from defence, take note that SOS would on a regular basis go for a run and have a hand in a few goals himself. I have NFI why people seem to forget this part... it's as if just because Scarlett was more attacking from D50 meant that SOS never did it. But we've all seen how many times SOS would trot from D50 and make attacking runs himself, even if they were gangly-like in appearance.

It's an annoying little misconception... Geelong supports love to use it to curry favour with Scarlett.

 

[matt decat]

Funny how the thread asks who is the better full back.

i would rather have a full back who has the ability to go forward and kick goals instead of one that rarely ventures outside D50 (not that scarlett doesn't venture outside D50). and i'm sure there isn't a worse feeling than playing at full forward, and your direct opponent, the full back, is keeping you goalless while he is dragging you to his F50 and scoring 2 or 3 goals coz i sure as hell wouldn't want to be showed how to play at full forward by a full back.

 

[Go_Blues!]

Funny how the thread asks who is the better full back.

So who do you think?

It is easy to say the current player is better because they are closer to our minds. To me, they are different players but I would go for SoS because, well, the players he played against were better....but really, in all sport, you need to assume that the quality from one generation to the next is consistent so I don't think my argument works.....but SoS did play for Carlton!

They were happy days. Scarlet is a champion, but I have never seen a body player as good as SoS. How many sons does he have?

 

[Go_Blues!]

i would rather have a full back who has the ability to go forward and kick goals instead of one that rarely ventures outside D50 (not that scarlett doesn't venture outside D50). and i'm sure there isn't a worse feeling than playing at full forward, and your direct opponent, the full back, is keeping you goalless while he is dragging you to his F50 and scoring 2 or 3 goals coz i sure as hell wouldn't want to be showed how to play at full forward by a full back.

Yeah, but he did not really do that. He got moved forward from time to time. He did not play full-back and kick goals.

One thing about SoS that is easy to forget is that pretty much every game he would so something exceedingly stupid - a kick out straight to his direct opponent, a pass that missed its target by 20m, etc. Scarlet is more reliable but perhaps less brilliant.

 

[Thrawn]

He did not play full-back and kick goals.

Yes, he did.

Scarlet is more reliable but perhaps less brilliant.

How does that work?

 

[ctacp]

all this "but SOS wouldnt be able to play cos he'd get penalised" - imagine Dunstall, Lockett, Carey & Ablett if no defender could touch them each week, they'd have kicked 180 goals a season.

ctacp
curlier than a catoggio pube

 

[Jimthegreat]

I have no issue with this story. Scarlett is right up there with SOS IMO and it is semantics to argue who is better. SOS has the advantage of being versatile in that he could play full forward. Scarlett has the advantage in pace and off the ground. SOS may have adjusted to the current rules, in fact I am sure he would. It may have made him more human however.

Right up there with him? Wouldn't think so. Scarlett doesn't even take the number forward that often. SOS thrashed the very best, probably one of the two best groups of forwards in history (other late 60's-early 70's). The current lot of FF's don't even fo close as a group. 1995 finals series, SOS played on Darryl White, Carey and Ablett conceding one scrubby goal over the whole 3 games. Not only that SOS also went forward and kicked over 200 goals including bags of 10 & 8. I have the greatest respect for Scarlett but please don't compare him to SOS. That's a joke!

 

[Thrawn]

I have the greatest respect for Scarlett but please don't compare him to SOS. That's a joke!

Apparently I was throwing apples at Glenn Archer for daring to make such a suggestion.

 

[blue gunslinger]

Yep - SOS did it against the best power forwards
Case closed

 

[Jimthegreat]

Christ almighty, did people have a memory wipe recently that wiped out their entire memories of the 90s?

As good as Scarlett is, he is no Silvagni.

I have seen defensive efforts from SOS that Scarlett would have trouble doing - for example, Silvagni was the master of the last second spoil, even when the ball was at his opponent's chest a mile in front of him. Some of the spoils he would do were amazing, and incredibly freaky. You would always shake your head and go "how the hell did he get to that?" This sort of stuff was his artfor mand he would do it week in, week out - and no other FB would come close. Not to mention that he was a better mark - especially in contested situations. If you compare how many contested marks the two players would get 1v1, SOS would be in the lead. And this is against guys who were far superior aerialists than the current patch - guys like Carey, Ablett and Lockett. He was also fantastic 1v1 - perhaps arguably better than Scarlett.

The only thing Scarlett has over SOS is his kicking skills and his rebound from 50 - he did it more often than SOS and was more fluent, but somehow this made the misconception that SOS never made attacking runs himself, which I found quite absurd. Silvagni had quite the tank (no pun intended), and had the fitness and the pace to actually lead up a little into the midfield and he actually did those things, despite the comments from Geelong supporters.

Comparatively, here is what both FBs had to contend with:

Bolded: Silvagni's opponents
Italicised: Scarlett's opponents
Underlined: Both their opponents

1,360 Tony Lockett
1,299 Gordon Coventry
1,254 Jason Dunstall
1,057 Doug Wade
1,030 Gary Ablett
970 Jack Titus
915 Leigh Matthews
874 Peter McKenna
839 Matthew Lloyd
817 Bernie Quinlan
778 Kevin Bartlett
758 Matthew Richardson
748 Saverio Rocca
738 Stephen Kernahan
735 Bill Mohr
727 Peter Hudson
727 Wayne Carey
722 Harry Vallence
707 Dick Lee
681 Bob Pratt
662 Jack Moriarty
633 Alistair Lynch
630 David Neitz
629 Michael Moncrieff
607 Michael Roach
594 Stewart Loewe
593 Kelvin Templeton
588 Tony Modra
575 Simon Beasley
575 Simon Madden
574 Richard Osborne
572 Norm Smith
561 Paul Salmon
554 Chris Grant
549 Peter Daicos
548 Dick Harris
540 Lindsay White
540 Fraser Gehrig
539 Barry Hall
537 John Coleman
527 Brian Taylor
514 Peter Sumich
511 John Longmire

Not to mention the discrepancy between AA jumpers - SOS 7 as opposed to Scarlett's 3. If not anything else, this shows that Silvagni had been dominant in his position for a much longer period of time - also in an era where arguably there were better FBs running around so it's not like he was the only good one out there. He was also a more versatile player, who could kick bags of goals for you.

Should I not mention Silvagni's '95 finals series where he kept all of Carey, White and Ablett to a combined total of one goal? Has Scarlett done anything that impressive? Ever?

Some people seem to think Scarlett is better because of his run from FB alone. They forget that the prime job for a FB is to stop his opponent from kicking goals and having an influence on a game... and SOS was better than him at doing that, on far superior opponents. Everything is secondary and merely a bonus - if you want to discuss run from D50, then that is what CHB and HBFs do more often than not because their positions allow more freedom to do that.

As for the scragging issue, pay no attention to that. Defenders scrag all the time, even today. How many times have we seen Scarlett scrag Fevola for example? Yes, that's right - many times. Yet some Geelong supporters would some believe that the scragging SOS did meant he was an inferior FB. Quoting the different rules and using them as a basis to argue who was better is incredibly foolish - you can only compare players by what they did, what they achieved. By their respective strengths and weaknesses... things that they can use in any era.

You did some work there. You're spot on. well done.

You can add Bernie Quinlan in as SOS gave him a couple of beatings in his very early days.

 

[Just Kreuzing]

Does Scarlett even qualify for comparison seeing as though he rarely plays on an opponent let alone beat them!!!!

When he does play on an opponent he usually allows Harley, Egan, or Taylor etc to take the main forwards to allow him to run off down the ground, The perfect case in point being the freo game a couple of weeks ago when they allowed Taylor to be torn apart by Pavilich.

 

[The Teflon Dean]

W. Carey, G. Ablett snr, T. Locket, J. Dunstall, A. Lynch, G. Lyon, S. Rocca, T. Modra, P. Sumich>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> B. Fevola, D. Bradshaw, F. Gehrig, A. Rocca, J. Roughead, J. Westoff, T. Hawkins, N. Thompson, Q, Lynch

Richo, Lloyd dont count as both players have played on them.

Massive class difference that SOS had to contain. SOS would have not have even bothered turning up against some of the players Scarlett has to contend with. Not talking anything away from Scarlett as he is a gun, but comparing the 2 in this way heavily turns it SOS's way.

"Wayne Carey would get 35 to 40 free kicks per match if I had to play on him under todays rules and conditions." - Glen Jacovich.

It's fair to conclude SOS would have coughed up a few as well.

My opinion?

Better full back? Scarlett.

Better overall footballer? Silvagni.

 

[mightymightyblues]

Scarlett is obviously a champion and so was sos.
But SOS is full back of the century which means he is rated as the best full back of all time, so arguing that Scarlett is better than sos means arguing over Scarlett being the best full back in the history of the game. Its very debatable but I wonder how Scarlett would have gone on Lockett, Ablett, Carey and Dunstall back in their prime. Full forwards like that aren't around anymore so Scarlett isn't having such competition as Sos had back then..