Coventry Coleman Medal

[Azzballz Deluxe]

Whatever buddy, I'm not the one saying that a player who couldn't even play 100 games is the best forward ever. Whatever the AFL medal is called doesn't really worry me that much, but Coventry is and was, far and away, the benchmark for any forward of any era. He played on mud pile suburban grounds and against thug backmen who would play 'prisons,' with forwards as the new guys. Coventry didn't have the luxury of modern medicos either, just tough. 98 games, yep about as much credibility as anything else the AFL has done lately, embarassing really.

Sorry, Lockett holds the record now

Coleman was the best goal-kicker.
He was an absolute freak

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

Yes definately.

Yep, and Coleman is the Bradley of goal-kicking

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

What about Dunstall!!! How about we hand out PIGGY'S MEDAL to the leading goalkeeper!

Ok, my thoughts are... gotta be Coleman... doesnt matter if he didnt play as many games... its like saying Ponting is a better batsman than Bradman as he has played more and scored more. I dont think its purely about the # of goals, but the manner of goals... and Coleman also has the highest goals p/game average (like Bradman in batting!)

Exactly

Just give Collingwood a medal, maybe that'll shut em up

 

[Frederlick]

If he played at collingwood he with as many games as Coventry he would have kicked 1500+.

This debate is over

If? If he was tough enough to play 300 sure, but he didn't, so WTF is the point of speculating that he could have kicked 1500? The fact remains he isn't even in the ball park.

This debate is over? Is there an echo in here?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Coleman kicked more goals per game than Coventry.

Should have called it the Hudson medal then.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Nice attempt to be a smart arse, but what exactly IS named after a Collingwood player?.

I dont think the Copeland Trophy is even named after a Collingwood player.

 

[Frederlick]

What about Dunstall!!! How about we hand out PIGGY'S MEDAL to the leading goalkeeper!

Ok, my thoughts are... gotta be Coleman... doesnt matter if he didnt play as many games... its like saying Ponting is a better batsman than Bradman as he has played more and scored more. I dont think its purely about the # of goals, but the manner of goals... and Coleman also has the highest goals p/game average (like Bradman in batting!)

Actually now I see the light, it is like most other Australian Sports Medals, named after the second best person in the field as no one will ever equal Bradman's achievement. Coventry is the same. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Frederlick]

Yep, and Coleman is the Bradley of goal-kicking

Don't go bringing Carlton into this!

 

[NimChief]

How about we name it the Longmire medal?

Youngest ever player to be the League's leading goal kicker.

 

[bombers_4_ever]

98 games? what a pretender! Coventry played in something like 76 finals games alone, I'm sure Coventry wouldn't be too worried about not having it named after him, might as well leave it named after a pretender, fits in with most things the AFL do these days.

Dude your forgetting one thing. Coleman did his knee and had no choice but to retire. Back in those days they didn't have knee reconstructions. If they did he might have been better than Coventry. Know your history before posting a stupid thread.

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

Don't go bringing Carlton into this!

Idiot, i meant Keplar

 

[juddy_Like]

The whole point of naming things/ places/ etc, is to recognise the great/ outstanding work of those of yester year. I cant remember 1 thing that was named after something, that was undeserved.

The Colemen medal at the time was not an issue, nor should it be now. If we all leave our alligences behind and accept, that Colemen was a great goal-kicker, we would say the award being named after him was just.

Colemen has the medal named after him. Coventry has a whole side/stand (plz correct me) named after him at the Dome. Plugger ditto. So im pretty sure that the great FFs of yester-year are pretty well recognised.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

Coventry is no doubt deserving, but they arnt going to change the name now, presonally i dont mind, Coleman is a legend and well deserves to have it named after him

Coleman sounds like goalman
Coventry sounds like...well... Coventry.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I dont think the Copeland Trophy is even named after a Collingwood player.

Sure it is, Robbie Copeland

 

[Frederlick]

Sorry, Lockett holds the record now

Coleman was the best goal-kicker.
He was an absolute freak

Didn't mention the record, which I am well aware Plugger broke about 50 years after Coventry retired. He is the benchmark because he was that far ahead of the rest at the time that they may as well have been apes with their tails snapped off and taught to stand upright. I don't have to use goals per game ratios to justify Coventry, because quantity has a quality all of its own when it comes to being a full forward.

 

[hirdy_is_champ]

I'm sure they all saw Coventry play too? Yeah right.

and Coventry kicked 12 goals on debut??

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

Didn't mention the record, which I am well aware Plugger broke about 50 years after Coventry retired. He is the benchmark because he was that far ahead of the rest at the time that they may as well have been apes with their tails snapped off and taught to stand upright. I don't have to use goals per game ratios to justify Coventry, because quantity has a quality all of its own when it comes to being a full forward.

Coleman>>>>>>Coventry

 

[Frederlick]

Dude your forgetting one thing. Coleman did his knee and had no choice but to retire. Back in those days they didn't have knee reconstructions. If they did he might have been better than Coventry. Know your history before posting a stupid thread.

How have I got my history wrong? Did the the guy played 98 games or not? For whatever reason that was it. Coventry toughed out 300 so my point is I couldn't care less about why Coleman had to retire and I didn't mention anything about it in my thread. Coventry was in the same boat playing in the 20's and 30's so your point is what? Don't clutch at straws to talk him up, it just makes you look desperate.

 

[ManWithNoName]

If? If he was tough enough to play 300 sure, but he didn't, so WTF is the point of speculating that he could have kicked 1500? The fact remains he isn't even in the ball park.

This debate is over? Is there an echo in here?

You do realise he suffered a career ending knee injury yes?

 

[Frederlick]

You do realise he suffered a career ending knee injury yes?

I'am well aware that he dislocated his knee in 1953 and despite surgery couldn't play again. Where have I stated otherwise? This
doesn't change the fact he played 98 games.

 

[Disrespect_16]

Didn't mention the record, which I am well aware Plugger broke about 50 years after Coventry retired. He is the benchmark because he was that far ahead of the rest at the time that they may as well have been apes with their tails snapped off and taught to stand upright. I don't have to use goals per game ratios to justify Coventry, because quantity has a quality all of its own when it comes to being a full forward.

Surprised you can even use a computer at your age mate, as obviously with the authority with which you post, you have watched both Coleman's and Coventry's careers extensively. Sometimes, I wish we didn't bother keeping stats, so people couldn't use them as an authority whenever it suits them. Haven't seen either play, but by all reports Coleman was a class above anyone else. Coventry was obviously no hack either, but you sprouting off stats that he was superior becuase he played x games and kicked x goals is ridculous and can't possibly prove that he is more worthy of having a medal named after him. I can just imagine in 100 years, when video footage of Ablett and Dunstall is rare as hens teeth, an absolute peanut of a Hawthorn fan (not totally unlike your goodself) trying to argue that based on his stats Dunstall was superior to Ablett.

 

[ManWithNoName]

I'am well aware that he dislocated his knee in 1953 and despite surgery couldn't play again. Where have I stated otherwise? This
doesn't change the fact he played 98 games.

Well you said he wasn't tough enough. Ridiculous statement given he was physically unable to play again.

It was 1954 BTW.

 

[Frederlick]

and Coventry kicked 12 goals on debut??

Coleman led Essendons goal kicking for 16 years, won a Brownlow (Champion of the Colony) played in 5 winning Grand Finals, kicked 9 goals in a GF and won the VFL goal kicking 6 times??? Don't bother answering that.

 

[Frederlick]

Surprised you can even use a computer at your age mate, as obviously with the authority with which you post, you have watched both Coleman's and Coventry's careers extensively. Sometimes, I wish we didn't bother keeping stats, so people couldn't use them as an authority whenever it suits them. Haven't seen either play, but by all reports Coleman was a class above anyone else. Coventry was obviously no hack either, but you sprouting off stats that he was superior becuase he played x games and kicked x goals is ridculous and can't possibly prove that he is more worthy of having a medal named after him. I can just imagine in 100 years, when video footage of Ablett and Dunstall is rare as hens teeth, an absolute peanut of a Hawthorn fan (not totally unlike your goodself) trying to argue that based on his stats Dunstall was superior to Ablett.

Ahh a blow in, just like your team. Why would I use stats? They are only how games are decided every week (you know goals and points and stuff). Obviously you have some trouble following the thread too. A Bomber actually first mentioned that someone that he knew had seen Coleman play and that he was the best ever! I pointed out that unless you had seen both play that is a big call, so how else can we debate this, yes the one you say ignore, stats. Funnily enough it was also a Bomber who used the number of goals per game to justify why Coleman was better and I have not said at all that the Coleman Medal should be changed or that he doesn't deserve to have it named after him. So how about you actually read the threads before jumping in with an ill informed opinion. Have I said Coleman was a bad player? No, I have said that Coventry's longevity and achievements put him in a class above. Now tootle of back to Power Tealalaide and dream of having a decent history.

 

[Frederlick]

Well you said he wasn't tough enough. Ridiculous statement given he was physically unable to play again.

It was 1954 BTW.

Physical longevity is certainly an important aspect of any player. By all reports Coleman was a relatively slightly built player who used speed, timing and an awesome vertical leap to win the ball. If his slight build contributed to him being injured then he wasn't as tough as some others, and so my statement is not ridiculous, nor is it meant to denigrate Coleman because he was injured at a time before knee reconstructions were common.