Buckley the Greatest says Malthouse

Remove this Banner Ad

Possibly Buckley would make it, but he is not the greatest as Malthouse and others have stated.

To answer your qustion with an example, let's say you were picking an Australain Cricket team of the century: It's like saying that Greg Chappell, who would probably make that side, is the greatest. Now Chappell was a great player but he is miles behind Bradman, Warne, Ponting, Gilchrist, etc.

Likewise, Buckley is/was a great player. There are plenty in front of him though.

Chapelli would be equal to punter and quite a fair way ahead of heals.
 
Bucks was possibly the most consistent champion player of the past 35 years, but he was not the matchwinner Matthews, Ablett, Carey, Lockett, Dunstall, Hird or Voss. Not even close to the first 3.
And footy is about winning matches.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

He is delusional.

:rolleyes:

It is only his opinion, which holds much more water than a pimply troller during school holidays.

FWIW I rank Ablett Snr above all. Don't think there were too many others with his consistency of performance though... he barely had a bad game.
 
Chapelli would be equal to punter and quite a fair way ahead of heals.

As a Captain yes Ian Chappell was far better than anyone else in the last 20 years but hardly a better bat, although you can also make the point that Ponting et al have never really faced a great attack. Waugh faced the tale end end of the West Indies in the WI to great effect, but he never went out on the Waca without a helmet like G Wood did to open against the best WI attack
 
Bucks was possibly the most consistent champion player of the past 35 years, but he was not the matchwinner Matthews, Ablett, Carey, Lockett, Dunstall, Hird or Voss. Not even close to the first 3.
And footy is about winning matches.

No that would be Harvey
 
How can you be the greatest without a premiership medal to your name?

A premiership does not say how good a player is, if that was the case, does that mean that Robert Harvey is not a great player? A premiership is won by a team, not a single player...

Sadly we didn't have the teams to give him a flag, we missed out in 2002..and in 2003 well let's not go there..there's been a lot of great players that never got a premiership, do we take that away from them being "great"?
 
He isn't the greatest of the past 35 years. That is obvious. Great player, but not greatest of his era let alone past 35 years.


Well Malthouse, Hird, Voss, Mcleod and Bob Rose disagree with you. Oh but of course you know more than them about the inside goings of the AFL. Your user name shows me how little you know about football.
 
No Hird stated Archer was the toughest, Buckley the best. Get your facts right.

Why is James Hird's opinion more valid than anyone else's?
St James might be close to God in some people's eyes, but his word is not gospel.

And Micky might think he is God, but he doesn't know everything. Naturally, he going to be biased towards his own champion player and captain, just as Pagan thinks Carey is the best, Sheeds probably thinks Hirdy's the best, Worsfold - Judd, Matthews - Voss, etc,
 
Skilton never stood up in finals so we shouldn't rate him with the greats. He played only 1 elimination final. A true test of a champion is to stand up in finals, Skilton couldn't even get his team there.

You're contradicting yourself their sonny. It's a bit hard to stand up in finals if you don't get to play in any. Skilton was on one leg in his one and only final, he could literally barely stand up. Buckley never got his team to a premiership, so I guess we shouldn't rate him with the greats either.
 
Interestingly Voss and Hird have also stated he is the best they played against. Bob Rose has says he is Collingwoods greatest footballer. Voss, Hird, Rose and Malthouse, gee the must all be delusional.

Where did Hird say this? Where did Voss say it? Plus as I said to you in another thread, if Hird said he was the best he'd played o it doesn't make him better than Hird, as Jimmy can't play on himself.

We all know it goes,
Hird, Voss>Buckley, not by much but they are better.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Collingwood have had some of the Greatest Players who have played the Game, most were the Greatest players of there Era, Bucks wasn't even that. A great player yes, greatest No.

How many of these 'greats' and 'legends' in the AFL Team of The Century?;)
 
You're contradicting yourself their sonny. It's a bit hard to stand up in finals if you don't get to play in any. Skilton was on one leg in his one and only final, he could literally barely stand up. Buckley never got his team to a premiership, so I guess we shouldn't rate him with the greats either.


Norm Smith Medal goose. Listed in his teams best players in 90 percent of finals he played. Yes he stood up when it counted.
 
Where did Hird say this? Where did Voss say it? Plus as I said to you in another thread, if Hird said he was the best he'd played o it doesn't make him better than Hird, as Jimmy can't play on himself.

We all know it goes,
Hird, Voss>Buckley, not by much but they are better.


Then why did Buckley continually towel up Voss one on one.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Buckley the Greatest says Malthouse

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top