Opinion Who wins? 2002 Premiership Team vs Brisbane Lions 2023

[Tom14]

The memory of the threepeat Lions are a mature physical bunch and people will always err on that over the modern game IMO. Although it's funny rewatching the game and seeing how many kicks do not hit a man, either laying it out in space and hoping your player gets there first or straight up to no one - you simply wouldn't get away with that these days, because there isn't the space and there's always multiple defenders around.

I can't find hard stats but I also feel that a big part of that strength and maturity is because our average age was substantially higher then compared to now. I think most players in that team were in their late 20s (which is why there was a big drop-off a couple of years later), whereas now we're actually still a pretty young team once outliers like Gunston are excluded - most in their mid 20s, and hence probably a bit younger than the 2002 team.

I rewatched the 2001 qualifying final on youtube a little while back while I had covid and it was shocking how much space there was in the middle of the ground to move the ball into. We were kicking 40 loopy passes into the centre square and it was wide open for us - in today's game there'd be 3-6 opposition players guarding that space and making it a much riskier kick.

 

[3KZ is Football]

I agree, but it'd be a suprisingly close contest between the corpse of the Don and former Labor Minister and current High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, Stephen Smith.

Of course, Steven Peter Devereux Smith probably has them both covered.

Don Bradman was definitely in a different faction. He had little affinity with the Australian Labor Party, which was steeped in the traditions of the largely Irish catholic Working Class.
‘Dear Mr Fraser’: Don Bradman’s extraordinary letter to new PM

 

[Viceregal]

Ashcroft would lose his spot to Ashcroft in a few years as well

Surely you would make sure that both Father and Son played in the same team ... or has that been done before?

 

[martinson]

I agree, but it'd be a suprisingly close contest between the corpse of the Don and former Labor Minister and current High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, Stephen Smith.

Of course, Steven Peter Devereux Smith probably has them both covered.

The Don played on uncovered wickets, had probably his glory years taken away with WW2 and just has an unparalleled record in Test cricket against the best opposition with his averages not propped up by playing against inferior teams. Importantly he was unstoppable in England where many great Aussie players have struggled from time to time.

Don't even see comparisons as a discussion imo . Just based on the figures if nothing else.

 

[M Malice]

The Don played on uncovered wickets, had probably his glory years taken away with WW2 and just has an unparalleled record in Test cricket against the best opposition with his averages not propped up by playing against inferior teams. Importantly he was unstoppable in England where many great Aussie players have struggled from time to time.

Don't even see comparisons as a discussion imo . Just based on the figures if nothing else.

Yes his record was so far in front of his contemporaries it isn't funny, nearly twice as good.... one of the best of all time from any sporting endeavour.

I can not think of another athlete who was that far in front of their peers.

 

[Dalions]

Yes his record was so far in front of his contemporaries it isn't funny, nearly twice as good.... one of the best of all time from any sporting endeavour.

I can not think of another athlete who was that far in front of their peers.

Such a pity he got out for a duck in that last innings.
Only needed 4 runs to finish with an average of 100.

 

[martinson]

Yes his record was so far in front of his contemporaries it isn't funny, nearly twice as good.... one of the best of all time from any sporting endeavour.

I can not think of another athlete who was that far in front of their peers.

Personally I think it's indisputable . I guess Usain Bolt is one who comes to mind . Maybe Walter Lindrum , Babe Ruth . Nicklaus is the greatest golfer ever for his performances on the big stage but he was beatable for some sustained periods.

The only time Don didn't perform exceptionally above his peers was the bodyline series

 

[Tom14]

The Don played on uncovered wickets, had probably his glory years taken away with WW2 and just has an unparalleled record in Test cricket against the best opposition with his averages not propped up by playing against inferior teams. Importantly he was unstoppable in England where many great Aussie players have struggled from time to time.

Don't even see comparisons as a discussion imo . Just based on the figures if nothing else.

My comparison was more so the decaying remains of the Don < current high commissioner to the UK Stephen Smith < current australian player Steven Peter Devereux Smith.

Its pretty clear that in terms of how far ahead he is of his contemporaries he's the most dominant player ever.

 

[Viceregal]

I sometimes wonder if you had a bowler who was so brilliant he could get people out for say an average of five runs each how long they would let him play for ... a batsman making 300 keeps the game going, a guy who turns a test match into only 3 days routinely not so much ...

 

[M Malice]

Personally I think it's indisputable . I guess Usain Bolt is one who comes to mind . Maybe Walter Lindrum , Babe Ruth . Nicklaus is the greatest golfer ever for his performances on the big stage but he was beatable for some sustained periods.

The only time Don didn't perform exceptionally above his peers was the bodyline series

The only other one I thought of after I posted that was another Australian... Heather McKay, she lost 2 games early in her career then went undefeated in Squash for the next 19 years to retirement. She also played hockey for Australia.
_______________________________________
Heather Blundell was born in Queanbeyan, New South Wales. As Heather McKay,[2] she completely dominated the sport of women's squash in the 1960s and '70s. She lost only two matches in her entire career (in 1960 and 1962), and was unbeaten in competitive squash matches from 1962 through to 1981, when she retired from active open squash.

McKay won her first British Open (considered to be the effective world championship of the sport at the time) in 1962.[citation needed] She then won it again every year for the next 15 consecutive years, losing only two games at the championship during that time. She usually won her finals matches comfortably. In the 1968 championship, she won the final against her compatriot Bev Johnson without dropping a point.[citation needed]

 

[3KZ is Football]

Yes his record was so far in front of his contemporaries it isn't funny, nearly twice as good.... one of the best of all time from any sporting endeavour.

I can not think of another athlete who was that far in front of their peers.

Totally Walter Lindrum.

As an indication of the esteem in which Lindrum was held, the critic Neville Cardus referred to Bradman as "the Lindrum of cricket".

Walter Lindrum - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[3KZ is Football]

Don’t forget Geoff Hunt. Dominated the world of Men’s Squash.

Geoff Hunt - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[martinson]

Don’t forget Geoff Hunt. Dominated the world of Men’s Squash.

Geoff Hunt - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The way I look at it in Bradman ,Lindrum and up to McKay and Hunt's era every boy in every school was influenced to play cricket ,it was the National sport, whereas who played billiards or squash ?

The heroes of Australia through the depression and well into the '30's were Bradman and Phar Lap. Top of the tree in the two national 'sports' at the time.

Coming out of the depression and not far off a World War where every family was impacted it was an era that will always be romantic to me because of the stories that I heard growing up. But once I had the chance to do some intense study it was a brutal era where terrible things happened that spared no one , but they clung on to their heroes . They were a resilient generation who didn't ask much and built the foundation for the great country we have today.

Even though you wouldn't know it if you spend too much time on SM.

 

[Grasshopper17]

I can't find hard stats but I also feel that a big part of that strength and maturity is because our average age was substantially higher then compared to now. I think most players in that team were in their late 20s (which is why there was a big drop-off a couple of years later), whereas now we're actually still a pretty young team once outliers like Gunston are excluded - most in their mid 20s, and hence probably a bit younger than the 2002 team.

Interestingly our current list is the oldest list we've ever had. Not sure how the 22/23 selected on game day compare tho.

 

[martinson]

Interestingly our current list is the oldest list we've ever had. Not sure how the 22/23 selected on game day compare tho.

If we're good enough we now have just about the perfect age profile to be winning a flag.

I liked it that we brought in Ashcroft, Fletcher and Wilmot which just rounded off the team with some youthful exuberance .

Sadly Ashy's not there but overall we've got a good balance age wise. Only one old timer and plenty nearing 30 which is probably the height of their powers.

 

[dlanod]

I can't find hard stats but I also feel that a big part of that strength and maturity is because our average age was substantially higher then compared to now. I think most players in that team were in their late 20s (which is why there was a big drop-off a couple of years later), whereas now we're actually still a pretty young team once outliers like Gunston are excluded - most in their mid 20s, and hence probably a bit younger than the 2002 team.

I'm going to correct myself, at least on 2002 vs 2023. In terms of those who actually played seniors (9+ games), both had a median age of 25 years old. Because of the consistency in that team, 2003 was nearly a year older but at least these two are quite comparable.

 

[M Malice]

We are not as reliant on our older players as some teams in the past have been, the likes of Rich, Zorko, Gunston, Lyons, Lester are not flag window closing type losses IMO.

We have already moved past Rich, Lyons good depth and that's all, Gunston not needed, Lester replaceable by Gardiner(Doedee?), Zorko fit and firing the only one of those who I feel is still a real weapon.