The Great Dasher Milburn

[darren forssman]

Don't even know why I initially responded to that,don't realy get it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_King

from the film based on a king book, the shining (you may loosely know the premise from the simpsons "the shinning"):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CMmwVRAtaI

 

[darren forssman]

In my time as a football fan i have definitely not seen a better half back / pocket player wearing the hoops then Milburn (Scarlett is obviously is number 1 choice Full Back).

i am not saying they're better but there have been quality half backs/back pockets (just not the defence as a whole):

steve hocking, sir kenneth hinkley, brad sholl to name a few.

 

[you pick one]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_King

from the film based on a king book, the shining (you may loosely know the premise from the simpsons "the shinning"):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CMmwVRAtaI

Thank's down loading move now. btjunkie.

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

i am not saying they're better but there have been quality half backs/back pockets (just not the defence as a whole):

steve hocking, sir kenneth hinkley, brad sholl to name a few.

All good players - was a huge 'Nails' Sholl fan too and Hinkley was definitely up there. However, Milburn's output is definitely superior....Sholl or Steve Hocking couldn't use the ball or make decisions to the same effect as Milburn, nor could Hinkley apply the physical presence the dash has been able to against both tall and small players.

Can't think of any prominent back flankers over the last 25 years who would really rate in the same capacity as Milburn? Not sure of era's before that...would be interesting to know what people know about Bernie Smith, Dick Grigg, Joe Slater, Nankers etc who are named within the team of the century. Not sure Sammy Newmans selection in the back pocket is truly a strategic move?

 

[you pick one]

i am not saying they're better but there have been quality half backs/back pockets (just not the defence as a whole):

steve hocking, sir kenneth hinkley, brad sholl to name a few.

You could throw Brenton Sanderson in with that lot to.

 

[Belisarius]

All good players - was a huge 'Nails' Sholl fan too and Hinkley was definitely up there. However, Milburn's output is definitely superior....Sholl or Steve Hocking couldn't use the ball or make decisions to the same effect as Milburn, nor could Hinkley apply the physical presence the dash has been able to against both tall and small players.

Can't think of any prominent back flankers over the last 25 years who would really rate in the same capacity as Milburn? Not sure of era's before that...would be interesting to know what people know about Bernie Smith, Dick Grigg, Joe Slater, Nankers etc who are named within the team of the century. Not sure Sammy Newmans selection in the back pocket is truly a strategic move?

Have to agree with this assessment. Steve Hocking was tough but did not use the ball as well as Milburn, and Milburn is probably stronger over head.

Yes and Sanderson was definitely a good HB player along with Scholl. Neither however were necessarily better than Milburn.

As far as Hinkley goes - he was probably better over head than Milburn and had more dash but was not as tough as Milburn. And Kenny played lose in the backline - and if you watch games against the Hawks (the premier team of the era) they tended to play thru Hinkley's HB position - knowing that his man was less likely to be manned up closely. Great to watch Kenny play and his great runs and very good marking but not that tight.

I think Milburn deserves to be in the backline over most since 1970 onwards. Certainly I would add Ian Nakervis as well to this list. Durable, competitive and effective HBs both of them.

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

Have only seen B'grade highlights of Nanker's but from all reports he was a great player.

Forgot about Sando' and absolutely deserves to be within that list....was B&F 2000 or 02' can't remember...However still think Milburn outranks him in a few key areas, but more prominently his general play awareness and decision making.

Loved watching Kenny Hinkley...especially when he donned the full sleeves!

Still for me, Milburn is just about the complete package for the position, hard as nails, uncomprimising, firecely competitive, skilled play with greater awareness and a good overhead mark to boot. About the perfect prototype for any back flanker position.

 

[vinum coupe]

All good players - was a huge 'Nails' Sholl fan too and Hinkley was definitely up there. However, Milburn's output is definitely superior....Sholl or Steve Hocking couldn't use the ball or make decisions to the same effect as Milburn, nor could Hinkley apply the physical presence the dash has been able to against both tall and small players.

Can't think of any prominent back flankers over the last 25 years who would really rate in the same capacity as Milburn? Not sure of era's before that...would be interesting to know what people know about Bernie Smith, Dick Grigg, Joe Slater, Nankers etc who are named within the team of the century. Not sure Sammy Newmans selection in the back pocket is truly a strategic move?

Whoa! I agree with your first paragraph. He does have them covered.

Bernie Smith - Brownlow medallist in a team regarded as our greatest. Immovable from that side.

Nankervis easily has Milburn covered. Which is not an insult.
When Ian was playing his last seasons he was my teacher. He is in the same mould now as Milburn. In that the game had caught up with him speed wise. But he always did things that defied his age.

Will never forget his forward pocket goal against north in the heaviest rain I have stood in. Not sure if we kicked 4 goals that day. But his was herioc in the amount of people he took on. His signature down back.

And S newman is out of place yes. But he cant go out for milburn. If anything he goes to the bench an Nankervis comes in.

No idea on the others, I defer to better knowledge.

 

[vinum coupe]

You could throw Brenton Sanderson in with that lot to.

Gee now you are going shallow.
Bews had Sanderson covered.
Darcy had Sanderson covered.

Actually if you line up the teams with regards to how poor we were back then Darcy would be regarded as a decent player in the current team. And I didn't like him.

 

[CamTinley]

Meh, stars, superstars, elite players, champions, club stalwarts. They're all pegged differently by each person. It's just opinion.

I've been going to the footy since 76 and there would be less than a dozen players from Geelong who I would regard as champions over that period.

Turner,
Ablett Snr
Ablett Jnr
Scarlett

Then?

Maybe G. Hocking

With his 133 Brownlow Votes

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

Gee now you are going shallow.
Bews had Sanderson covered.
Darcy had Sanderson covered.

Actually if you line up the teams with regards to how poor we were back then Darcy would be regarded as a decent player in the current team. And I didn't like him.

Don't think anyone was referring to Sando' within these brackets, i think the original post was just listing Sando' as one of the good back pockets over the last 25 years - for which Steve Hocking, Ken Hinkley, Brad Sholl and Darren Milburn were also listed.

As for the the club champion category....Yeah, i wouldn't remove Sammy Newman nor Nankers, but think that Milburn would definitely be an inclusion when compared to other Back Pocket/Flanker greats that have worn the hoops.... Sure there are better individual players, but a team can only be comprised of so many midfielders, rucks and star forwards....Milburn in my honest opinion is as good as anybody in that position over the course of the 25 years i have been watching, and i dare say over the entire history of the club.

 

[you pick one]

Gee now you are going shallow.
Bews had Sanderson covered.
Darcy had Sanderson covered.

Actually if you line up the teams with regards to how poor we were back then Darcy would be regarded as a decent player in the current team. And I didn't like him.

Remember were talking bp /hbf here if Bews kicked his 130 odd goals from back there there he would be indisputably the best ever.

Wasn't Darcy the full back?

 

[vinum coupe]

Yes Darcy ended up at FB.
Was a HBF though. That's how shit we were.

And Bews AND Nankervis were originally rovers.
It could be argued Bews was a better back pocket and Nankervis was a better rover.


Not sure how we can choose between what they were best at and how they were remembered?

 

[vinum coupe]

Remember were talking bp /hbf here if Bews kicked his 130 odd goals from back there there he would be indisputably the best ever.

Wasn't Darcy the full back?

BTW, one of those 130 goals was when he played in the back pocket and won goal of the year (may have been play of the year)

You remember it. Darts forward on the boundary (new stand side, hovey end) and gathers the ball. Meets an opponent, backtracks. Meets another opponent (does a blind turn). drops the ball, recollects, darts to the right around another facing away from the goal and snaps over the shoulder.


Well, something like that............

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

Remember the Bews goal! Classic....

Darcy wasn't a great fullback, did his job though, similar to Stephen O'reily ... who by memory actually had a pretty good 1995 i think?

Anyways, all side notes....Still yet to be convinced otherwise that Dash isn't worthy of a back pocket/flanker position in our greatest ever team, but thats just my opinion.

 

[darren forssman]

Darcy wasn't a great fullback, did his job though, similar to Stephen O'reily ... who by memory actually had a pretty good 1995 i think?

wasnt darcy originally a half forward/full forward that blight turned into a backman?

and o'reilly was a highly touted recruit who we didnt see the best of before he hightailed it back to perth to join freo.

 

[grantyc77]

Dasher is a champion, and is easily in our best 22, plays that loose man in defence better than most and can read the play better than anyone.

He deserves to be in for round 1 i just hope he can maintain is form from 2010

 

[you pick one]

Yes Darcy ended up at FB.
Was a HBF though. That's how shit we were.

And Bews AND Nankervis were originally rovers.
It could be argued Bews was a better back pocket and Nankervis was a better rover.


Not sure how we can choose between what they were best at and how they were remembered?

Yes odd situation, I suppose it really doesn't matter,I have great memories of them in both positions.

 

[you pick one]

wasnt darcy originally a half forward/full forward that blight turned into a backman?

and o'reilly was a highly touted recruit who we didnt see the best of before he hightailed it back to perth to join freo.

Had to look a bit of this up, but should have known this bit came from Joe's as a forward/ruckman,was pushed in to the backline in think through necessity.Your spot on DF.

The bit I had forgotten is he became a forward again later on and kicked a few bags of five and one of six.also a victorian rep.

 

[jim boy]

and o'reilly was a highly touted recruit who we didnt see the best of before he hightailed it back to perth to join freo.

We saw the best of O'Reilly alright, got the big V and was a major player for in his last season. He went west and became quite a very ordinary player.

In return we got Steven King so am quite happy with that result, but I feel for O'Reilly who may have had a very different career if he hadn't of headed back west.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

While I love Dasher and all he's brought to this club, as soon as the OP started attempting to justify list management and team selection on the basis of needing to get a bloke to a milestone (300) he should have known that's a non justifiable argument. If you want to talk about values and how to treat people, basing selection on that is a horrible value and sends completely the wrong message to the list. Not to mention that it tends to breed stagnation because change won't be made when it's needed. It's very simple, we pick the 22 players who are fittest and in the best form, every week, and that's it, regardless of 2 games or 278. It's open, it's transparent, everyone is equal, everyone knows what they need to do, and it drives people to continually improve because they know there's no gold passes. There is definitely room to honour our great club champions, but the selection table is not it, nor is the delistings and retirements time it either.

I certainly hope that's not the mindset our new coach has.

In any case I think it's largely irrelevant because I can't see Dasher's body being up to 22 games even if his form keeps him in the best side, so he'll fall marginally short of the 300.

Personally while Milburn had a good year I thought he should have called time, and I think he'll face a lot of competition for his spot in 2011, and rightly so.

 

[vinum coupe]

We saw the best of O'Reilly alright, got the big V and was a major player for in his last season. He went west and became quite a very ordinary player.

In return we got Steven King so am quite happy with that result, but I feel for O'Reilly who may have had a very different career if he hadn't of headed back west.

O'Rielly was a lot like Graham without the kick.
A lot of those guys struggled due to how poor we were. But I don't think he was very good.

 

[vinum coupe]

Nice post PO, sorry for coming over the top.

I don't think it's a simple best 22 this year.
With the sub rule and our need for a hint of youth I think it's best 20 with at least 2 picks of promise ( who hold their own)

And I make Menzel and T Hunt auto 18. So It's the best 18 with 2 picks of promise for me.

Sorry, broken record on this.

 

[darren forssman]

We saw the best of O'Reilly alright, got the big V and was a major player for in his last season. He went west and became quite a very ordinary player.

In return we got Steven King so am quite happy with that result, but I feel for O'Reilly who may have had a very different career if he hadn't of headed back west.

dont you mean sandgroper?

i thought o'reilly was quite good, maybe that was after watching schulze, darcy, mcrabb, etc before him.

the freo list may have been shit but still:

As a strong defender, he was targeted by the newly formed Fremantle Dockers for the 1995 season. He led an inexperienced backline in their initial seasons, and finished 4th, 1st and 6th in the Best and Fairest award in his first three years at the new club. Following the 1997 O'Reilly suffered a bad hamstring tear in which the muscle was completely torn off the bone. The 1998 and 1999 seasons saw him play at both ends of the ground, but not as effectively as the earlier years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_O'Reilly_(footballer)

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

While I love Dasher and all he's brought to this club, as soon as the OP started attempting to justify list management and team selection on the basis of needing to get a bloke to a milestone (300) he should have known that's a non justifiable argument. If you want to talk about values and how to treat people, basing selection on that is a horrible value and sends completely the wrong message to the list. Not to mention that it tends to breed stagnation because change won't be made when it's needed. It's very simple, we pick the 22 players who are fittest and in the best form, every week, and that's it, regardless of 2 games or 278. It's open, it's transparent, everyone is equal, everyone knows what they need to do, and it drives people to continually improve because they know there's no gold passes. There is definitely room to honour our great club champions, but the selection table is not it, nor is the delistings and retirements time it either.

I certainly hope that's not the mindset our new coach has.

In any case I think it's largely irrelevant because I can't see Dasher's body being up to 22 games even if his form keeps him in the best side, so he'll fall marginally short of the 300.

Personally while Milburn had a good year I thought he should have called time, and I think he'll face a lot of competition for his spot in 2011, and rightly so.

No one is justifying list management on the basis of getting a player to the 300 game mark. This has never been the cause of this thread nor has it ever been mentioned to nurse Milburn through a season.

Rather it is an acknowledgment on the contributions that a 300 game player, who still rightfully deserves to be in the team on his own merit, can have to the greater club. There is no doubt in my mind that Milburn serves as an aspirational marker and inspiration to many people not only at playing level, but in all facets associated with the club. Just look at the impact that Sam Newman (despite all his short falling bone headed media persona implicates) was still actively bringing to the club up until a few years ago. You don't go through 300 games without learning a few tricks of the trade and an ability to cope with the changing rigours and tactics that will continue as football evolves. I wonder how Gary Ablett Jnr, James Kelly, Steve Johnson, Jimmy Bartel look back at the influence of Peter Riccardi or Sanderson...i'm sure that they have learnt and in Sandersons case, continue to learn first hand from having that experience associated with the club.

As it stands now, Darren Milburn is more than worthy of his place in the Senior squad, i'm yet to be convinced otherwise and he is a great example to the youth of our squad about what being a footballer entails. I haven't seen much evidence of this apparent old age slide and from that i can only base his footballing credentials on what i have seen out on the park...which is needless to say absolute consistency and class.

No one at all has ever said that Milburn deserves any favours on the selection table, whether he gets to 300 doesn't really matter, he is a club champion and we should simply acknowledge the value of having such a player within our ranks. Hopefully we can make use of this further down the track when his playing days eventually do come to an end.

Further for list management purposes - i disagree with the stagnation that senior players cause. Whilst i certainly agree that you need to rotate players through the ranks, you also need to create an atmosphere that values the processes of gaining selection through merit. It is a balancing act and you will win some and loose some as you go through the process, but to dish out games to youth based on the apparent need to be 'given a shot' does not always work....Essendon, Richmond, Melbourne and Carlton have all been very guilty of this over the past decade and look where a lack of senior experience has taken them!!!