- Aug 15, 2005
- 8,648
- 697
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Hawthorn
Bucks was better
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Sydney v Brisbane Lions - 2:30PM AEST Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 61% chance -- What's your tip? -- Ticketing Buy, Sell -- Teams on Thurs »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Grand Final
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
People forget how great crawford was, and his off field antics took away from his on field talent.
How good buckley was is brainwashed via the media.
Anyone care to detail Crawford's shortcomings by comparison?
Who was supposedly giving Bucks 'help' when they were at the bottom say circa 1999?Crawf held together a crap side during the clubs worst era, while buckley still had some help. really, if you look at when crawf was in his prime, the only other decent thing at hawthorn (dunstall) left.
Crawford ahs probably tailed off a little bit in the last couple of years - but I rate him much more highly. Whilst Buckley was extremely good with his disposal and got a lot of the ball - much of that was on the half-back flank. IMO Nathan Buckley was a very good player - but definately not in the league of the other two he is compared to - Voss and Hird. Most AFL players who are asked that question in a newspaper/radio/television say Voss or Hird...
Crawford ahs probably tailed off a little bit in the last couple of years - but I rate him much more highly. Whilst Buckley was extremely good with his disposal and got a lot of the ball - much of that was on the half-back flank. IMO Nathan Buckley was a very good player - but definately not in the league of the other two he is compared to - Voss and Hird. Most AFL players who are asked that question in a newspaper/radio/television say Voss or Hird...
Buckley was a better mark and a much better kick for starters.
More disposals, more goals, more Brownlow votes.
Who was supposedly giving Bucks 'help' when they were at the bottom say circa 1999?
I do believe that Bucks is probably ahead, but not the extent that this is a non event and the Buckley is a mile better the Crawford, when that was not the case. At their prime these were two elite football players, that were in the top echelon of players in the competition.
It is pretty close, but as i said Buckley just ahead.
Much better kick....yeah sure....
Buckley would win more one-on-one marking contests but Crawford was quicker and won more of the hard ball.
It is difficult to compare as they were poles apart in the roles they played as midfielders. But both champions and match winners.
It just annoys me how media exposure can inflate or deflate people's perceptions of a player ability and acheivements.
Much better kick....yeah sure....
Buckley would win more one-on-one marking contests but Crawford was quicker and won more of the hard ball.
It is difficult to compare as they were poles apart in the roles they played as midfielders. But both champions and match winners.
It just annoys me how media exposure can inflate or deflate people's perceptions of a player ability and acheivements.
oh dearBuckley Hands down...
His kicking ability on both sides was the best in the 90s and early 2000s. He could hit a target from 60m away. Kick goals on the run, take pack marks. Over his head one on one he hardley ever got beaten.
I remember in Carey's prime, bucks would line up on him and teach him a few hard lessons..
Bucks easy!
Crawf played with plenty of decent players when the Hawks were shit.well they had Presy and Michael in defence, williams on half forward rotating through the midfield, and rocca at FF.
now compare that to the hawks, who had tony woods retiring, and thats about it.
Alex Jesaulenko Medal