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.
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
If Neale was poor in the prelim I'd go with Martin on account of 3 consecutive outstanding knockout finals performances resulting in a flag. He had a great final and a not so great one, to follow an outstanding 17 game H&A season. The one he wasn't great in didn't matter anyway as his side won easily.Ok I understand your points.
So using your reasoning in your comment is your answer
A) Dusty
B) Neale
C) I don’t know due to various factors
I am asking your opinion. It is a simple question
Ok I understand your points.
So using your reasoning in your comment is your answer
A) Dusty
B) Neale
C) I don’t know due to various factors
I am asking your opinion. It is a simple question
If Neale was poor in the prelim I'd go with Martin on account of 3 consecutive outstanding knockout finals performances resulting in a flag. He had a great final and a not so great one, to follow an outstanding 17 game H&A season.
But Neale wasn't poor. He was the second best player on the ground in a losing prelim. His team mates were severely outplayed so he didn't get to play in a 3rd final (let alone a 4th like Martin) or have a shot at premiership success.
Martin's finals series still made it closer than it was at the end of H&A. But marking down Neale from what happened in finals is basically just acknowledging Richmond were better in the finals that counted.
Mate he’s literally just told you not only in virtually scientific terms why one player was better than another across the duration of a season and why the only possible argument you could use to suggest otherwise is rendered almost moot anyway because his extra opportunities to do so were provided by being in a slightly stronger team.
Being deliberately obtuse for the sake of banter or antagonism or whatever won’t change that and by any measure it’s tiresome and even I’m over reading through the same s**t being regurgitated over and over again either because you’re bored or you just struggle to deal with people holding a majority opinion that’s contrary to yours.
Neale.Ok, I like that reasoning.
Now what is your answer. A, B or C ?
Oh he did, did he?
What was his answer? Dusty, Neale or “I don’t know”
I’d like to know your answer too.
Neale.
If I surmised that Neale choked rather than his side choked through that finals series to cost Brisbane a flag (you can argue this happened last year in the GF), I would go with Martin.
He didn't choke. His side made a home prelim, he starred (2nd BOG in a prelim your team is thrashed in is a fair effort) but his team mates he didn't and BAM, there goes his opportunity to go on and win a Norm Smith or be an Ayres medallist (if his side wins he gets an automatic 10 votes in the prelim) potentially.
It can be true that Martin's finals series carried his season up from good to superstar status while still thinking Neale was the best performing player of the year. Different if he stunk it up in a close prelim and cost his team the game. But he didn't.
Wrong. I believe if a player's side is poor in a knockout final and he is outstanding, you cannot hold it against him that he gets to play 2 less finals than player X. I believe in fair comparisons, so a 4 match finals series cannot be used against a player who only got to play in 1 or 2.Right and this is the problem and why we clash. At a fundamental level you believe H&A is the “Main Event” in football rather than finals which is a little side thing. When in fact H&A is literally just a qualifier.
You’d rather not have the AA team, Finals MVP and NS in a flag year guy because Neale was better in H&A and was good in a final where his team got thumped. Keeping in mind Dusty then smashed that same team in GF a week later.
That’s f’ed logic and quite disturbing.
Wrong. I believe if a player's side is poor in a knockout final and he is outstanding, you cannot hold it against him that he gets to play 2 less finals than player X. I believe in fair comparisons, so a 4 match finals series cannot be used against a player who only got to play in 1 or 2.
Players who are poor in their finals series and culpable for them losing close knockout finals? Absolutely they get marked down and vice versa for ones who stand up. The closer the final the more they made a crucial difference e.g Martin's 2020 prelim. And I do respect players who are outstanding in losing finals where their team mates are beaten, but individually that player could not do any more. That is standing up in adversity. But you are relying on 21 other players to actually win.
The emotional language and swearing at the end makes you appear like an angry 13 year old. It adds nothing to the debate and is no different to going the man. Everything I have said is logical, but you are now throwing a tantrum.
If Neale and Martin's H&A seasons were remotely close then Martin's finals could edge him ahead. But they weren't. Neale had 51 more coaches votes then was at no fault for his side being knocked out of a prelim.
The last point I want to finish on is that if there WAS a season where finals carried more weight in modern times it was 2020. Martin had 20% of his games that year as finals, which is unheard of without injuries. A usual premiership player in a normal length season has around 10% of their season as finals. THAT is what makes Martin get close to Neale. The fact that finals made up a (relatively) huge portion of his season. But Neale was still outstanding through the whole year and in 50% of his finals, so that was enough to hold on.
Especially in the modern era, systems and structures are so refined that you need your 21 team mates to perform when it's crunch time in finals. It's silly to suggest otherwise. Sure you can have a great cameo and be your side's best player but it matters little if your team perform as Neale's did in the 2020 prelim. Neale you can argue dragged Brisbane to top 4 when they shouldn't have, as evidenced by how they performed in a knockout final.Yes I know, and coincidently GAS got a NS in a losing GF.
I know most people think players are better when they actually win the game for their team.
It’s 180 logic in Geelong, which is why I say you guys have a losers mentality.
I guess Dusty should not tried to win the games for Richmond. Finals MVP and NS, clearly wasn’t good enough as Richmond won the games.
Like I said your logic is f’ed
Yes I know, and coincidently GAS got a NS in a losing GF.
I know most people think players are better when they actually win the game for their team.
It’s 180 logic in Geelong, which is why I say you guys have a losers mentality.
I guess Dusty should not have tried to win the games for Richmond. Finals MVP and NS, clearly wasn’t good enough as Richmond won those games.
Like I said your logic is f’ed
Especially in the modern era, systems and structures are so refined that you need your 21 team mates to perform when it's crunch time in finals. It's silly to suggest otherwise. Sure you can have a great cameo and be your side's best player but it matters little if your team perform as Neale's did in the 2020 prelim. Neale you can argue dragged Brisbane to top 4 when they shouldn't have, as evidenced by how they performed in a knockout final.
Let me guess, you marked down Bont's 2023 because he couldn't singlehandedly take them to finals let alone a flag? Whereas Jack Crisp had a good finals series in a premiership season so he automatically must've been better than Bont?
Again I'm highlighting the emotional language, lame abbreviated swearing and personal attacks, just to show where you can do better in the future. That is how a derelict speaks. I'm not going to make fun of you for it anymore, but rather hold a mirror up and not sink to that level.
Cleansweep17 an analogy is a 100m freestyle race. But athlete A gets a 20m head start whereas athlete B has to swim the full 100m. Are their completed times a fair comparison? No, because one had the opportunity to get a better time through advantageous circumstances. Or a long jump where one athlete gets to jump from half a metre in front. Of course his jump should be "bigger".
Martin and Neale 2020 this is how it played out. Neale was by far the better player when they had both completed 19/18 games (where Neale's season ends, i.e he has completed the 2020 PF and Martin has completed the SF). Martin got the two extra finals because his team was good enough, and won the two BOGs on the way to a flag. Neale never had the opportunity. His "race" was cut short. If HE caused it to be cut short, fair enough (by playing poorly). But he didn't.
This is what you do, you separate Martin from his team and say he was only good because of them when it was the other way around. As per the awards he contributed the most in Richmond’s finals wins and earned that dynasty.
That’s why he’ll be remembered as the best finals player ever, not Lachie Neale (who had the advantage of playing on his home deck) with some hypothetical matches.
No current season stats available
Just before you were slagging off a club who’s been more successful in recent times than you have as losers and now you’re saying that your own team of ‘winners’ were only winners because 21 of them were otherwise not good enough to achieve anything
Geelong should be embarrassed that Chris Scott wanted to recruit Tarryn Thomas , it says a lot about Scott's character or lack thereof
I'd be more embarrassed about lacking critical thinking and comprehension skills if I were youGeelong should be embarrassed that Chris Scott wanted to recruit Tarryn Thomas , it says a lot about Scott's character or lack thereof.
He was just being Robin Hood, those places had insurance as well. He never threatens women either.
We can cross that bridge if Thomas ever pulls on a Geelong jumper. But here in reality Pickett has represented Richmond FC 87 times which for a moral crusader must be hard to stomach.He was just being Robin Hood, those places had insurance as well. He never threatens women either.