Robert Harvey V Nathan Buckley

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by Falchoon
It took Buckley 10 years to figure out the best way to hit a leading forward was with a well weighted kick rather than a bullet, Harvey is hugely underrated in that area, and his vision with handball would be in the top 5 ever.

Hugely underrated disposal skills.

Harvey's handballs are flawless but it is known that his kicking is inconsistent. Yes, he can hit people on the chest but not as much as you would think.
 
Bentleigh said:
Its easier to win brownlows in a sh1te team than a strong one.

Since when?

Lets look at the last 15 Brownlow winners, and where their team finished:

2004: Chris Judd - 7th on the ladder
2003: Nathan Buckley, Adam Goodes, Mark Ricciuto - 2nd, 4th and 6th on the ladder
2002: Simon Black - 2nd on the ladder
2001: Jason Akermanis - 2nd on the ladder
2000: Shane Woewodin - 3rd on the ladder
1999: Shane Crawford - 9th on the ladder (they missed the finals by a game)
1998: Robert Harvey - 6th on the ladder
1997: St Kilda - 1st on the ladder
1996: Michael Voss, James Hird - 3rd and 6th on the ladder
1995: Paul Kelly - 12th on the ladder
1994: Greg Williams - 2nd on the ladder
1993: Gavin Wanganeen - 1st on the ladder
1992: Scott Wynd - 3rd on the ladder
1991: Jim Stynes - 6th on the ladder
1990: Tony Liberatore - 7th on the ladder
1989: Paul Couch - 3rd on the ladder

3 of them played on teams that missed the finals (Crawford, Kelly, Liberatore), the lowest win total for any of the teams being 8, and two of them only missing the finals by a game. By and large, this pretty much proves that it's pretty damn unlikely to win a Brownlow on a bad team, hence why it took until Collingwood played in consecutive Grand Finals and Nathan Buckley had won a Norm Smith medal before he won a Brownlow.
 
daveymagik said:
Harvey's handballs are flawless but it is known that his kicking is inconsistent. Yes, he can hit people on the chest but not as much as you would think.

There is definitely a perception that that is the case but like Falchoon I don't think it is entirely accurate.

His abilty to to find a target inside 50 under extreme pressure is first class. When Robert Harvey gets the ball in the centre of the ground he almost always finds a target. Many of these are little chip kicks to a player that has created space but doesn't look in a position to receive the footy.

Perhaps people are confused with the fact that he has never been a big goalkicker. I'd like to hear the opinions from forwards like Lockett, Loewe and Gehrig and current coaches on his disposal to key forwards.

Buckley will rightfully go down in the history books as a champion player. However I haven't seen a better player than Harvey in my lifetime.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Robert Harvey is not just the best midfielder I've ever seen, he's about equal with Carey for the best player I've ever witnessed.

I rate Buckley extremely high, and believe he virtually carried Collingwood for a decade, but he's not Harvey.

Buckley was a shining light in the Magpie dark days, but Harvey revolutionised the role of the midfielder to being the running/ball-getting/perfect skills machine in a singular package.

In a nutshell:

Buckley's a Collingwood champion; Harvey's a football legend.
 
Buckley.

For one reason alone - I don't think there is anything I've seen Harvey do that Buckley isn't/wouldn't be capable of. However, when you flip the coin, there are things Buckley does that I don't think Harvey could do (mainly in terms of disposal by foot and ability to play up forward/kick goals).

Harvey may be a great person and a fair player, but assuming we're going on their talents as a footballer, Buckley gets it for me.
 
Without a shadow of a doubt, Robert Harvey would be in my side any day before the receiver. Two brownlows,loyalty to one club - unlike mr ï wanna play in a premiership" - well mr buckley, if money hadnt talked you would have played in three premieship sides with brisbane. Harves by a country mile.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The Fireman said:
The poll has reflected the true result , Harvs is freak the guy has suffered leather poisoning nearly every game he has ever played and let's not forget that he doesn't mind getting the ball himself.

All that applies to Buckley too, though.
 
Buckley gets my vote.

Harvey is a brilliant player, looks good, gets lots of the footy, it's just a pity he gets most of them in the wrong position and then disposes of it to the wrong position. Malcolm Blight said it one day after Harvey had 40 touches against the Crows..... some thing like "he ran to positions I wouldn't have necessarily gone to".

Picture this....Greg Williams and Robert Harvey get the ball in the same position... Williams whips out a quick handball to a running Bradley who runs and kicks long to full forward... Harvey gets the ball dodges 4 players, jinks back, runs around and does a dinky pass to Winmar on the wing. St Kilda fans in rapture, opposition backmen man up, play stops.One team gets a goal, the other doesn't. One team wins and one team loses.
I want players whose play scores goals or stops opposition goals. Most midfield possessions mean little to the end result.

In the right team ( any team with some other players who could play) through the late 90's Buckley would have been near unstoppable.

So if its to look good by all means have Harvey.
I preferred winning games.
 
Originally posted by PJKBuckley gets my vote.

Harvey is a brilliant player, looks good, gets lots of the footy, it's just a pity he gets most of them in the wrong position and then disposes of it to the wrong position. Malcolm Blight said it one day after Harvey had 40 touches against the Crows..... some thing like "he ran to positions I wouldn't have necessarily gone to".

Picture this....Greg Williams and Robert Harvey get the ball in the same position... Williams whips out a quick handball to a running Bradley who runs and kicks long to full forward... Harvey gets the ball dodges 4 players, jinks back, runs around and does a dinky pass to Winmar on the wing. St Kilda fans in rapture, opposition backmen man up, play stops.One team gets a goal, the other doesn't. One team wins and one team loses.
I want players whose play scores goals or stops opposition goals. Most midfield possessions mean little to the end result.

In the right team ( any team with some other players who could play) through the late 90's Buckley would have been near unstoppable.

So if its to look good by all means have Harvey.
I preferred winning games.

True. And although people say Buckley gets less of the hard ball than Harvey, he also takes more of and better marks, contested and uncontested. Harvey has been let down by his kicking occassionally, saw him miss a few sitters this year.
 
Pie 4 Life said:
1 Brownlow
1 Norm Smith
6 B + F Awards
Countless number of awards.

Buckley is much better than Harvey.

Banger has never played a bad game. Buckley has.

Whilst they are both out and out champions this one fact puts Banger slightly ahead for me.
 
Bucks by a country mile.....only reason that harvey is winning the poll is that no-one likes buckley.(well besides collingwood supporters) :D
 
garth p said:
Banger has never played a bad game. Buckley has.

Whilst they are both out and out championsd this one fact puts Banger slightly ahead for me.


Harsh call, both are close to the two most consistant midfielders of the last 10-12 seasons. Buckley at his best can be far more damaging than Harvey at his best, though.
 
Petrie Dish said:
Harsh call, both are close to the two most consistant midfielders of the last 10-12 seasons. Buckley at his best can be far more damaging than Harvey at his best, though.

I disagree..

It's a fair call to say Buckley is a better kick than Harvey he sure as hell is no doubt about it but strangley enough he still make's more disposal errors that Harvey or though looking at the stats it is very close.

Harvey has always been a better handball IMO and his ability to creat play out of the hopeless situation put's him right up there if you ask me.

Harvey could break the line's and carry the ball better than Buckley or tho Nathan has that great kick that can carry the pack.
 
SaInts SKill said:
I disagree..

Of course you do, you're a Saints fan.

It's a fair call to say Buckley is a better kick than Harvey he sure as hell is no doubt about it but strangley enough he still make's more disposal errors that Harvey or though looking at the stats it is very close.

I'd expect Buckley to make more disposal errors. For all his brilliance in close, many of Harvey's possessions are short kicks or handballs, whereas Buckley often looks for targets 55-60 metres up the field.

Harvey has always been a better handball IMO and his ability to creat play out of the hopeless situation put's him right up there if you ask me.

Harvey is one of the best handballers I've seen, probably behind Diesel and Couch, but in terms of creating play, I'll take Buckley every time because I believe he can be more damaging with the footy in his hands.

Harvey could break the line's and carry the ball better than Buckley or tho Nathan has that great kick that can carry the pack.

Again, I think you under-estimate Buckley's abilities to run with the footy and break tackles. Harvey was so strong through the hips and was so elusive, but Buckley is built like a truck, yet still covers enormous distances and is that good at finding space that whether he can break a tackle is often irrelevant.
 
Petrie Dish said:
Again, I think you under-estimate Buckley's abilities to run with the footy and break tackles. Harvey was so strong through the hips and was so elusive, but Buckley is built like a truck, yet still covers enormous distances and is that good at finding space that whether he can break a tackle is often irrelevant.

I don't under estimate it but in this particular area Harvey is way ahead.

At no stage in Buckleys carear has he ever been as good at breaking takles or working his way out of heavy trafic like Harvey can.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Robert Harvey V Nathan Buckley

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top