Who's the better full back - Dench or Martyn??

Remove this Banner Ad

Aussie_Roo

Club Legend
Nov 7, 2000
1,454
43
Sydney
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Looking at our team of the century, I couldn't help but wonder whom you all think is the better full back - Martyn or Dench. I've had this arguement with my old man many of times, and we can't figure it out. Given that Martyn has played on 3 of the best full forwards of all time (Dunstall / Lockett / Ablett) and beaten them all compared with Dench (McKenna / Hudson / Wade who were all champion players but in my opinion not in the same class as the 90s ff), I think he was the better full back. What do you think??
 
Sorry, have to disagree here. Dench was an outstanding full back, either one out in a marking contest or backing his judgement and runing out of defence with the ball. He was faster than Mick, almost as strong, and more skilled. He would get my vote.
As to the FF of the day, you can only play on who is there, but if you think Dunstall or Lockett were better than Hudson was, then think again. Hudson was a freak. McKenna was the best kick for goal I have ever seen, but was very one dimensional, so I would rate the 3 modern day players higher than him. Ablett was the modern day freak, but I would love to have seen Dench play on him. He would certainly have matched him in the physical stakes, and he would have run off him fairly easily I think.

------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.
 
I agree with CIK that Dench was better than Mick.
Incredibly I also endorse his remarks about Hudson.He was a freak and as good if not superior to Dunstall and Lockett!


warrior
 

Log in to remove this ad.

CIK
Its just I had agreed with you on a couple of other issues in regard to the Roos,but to agree on the merits of a player from another club playing 30 years ago was "incredible".

I do not agree with you on McKernan!!!!

warrior
 
I thought it was Steve "I can hang on all I like and never give away a free kick" Silvagni, but nevertheless I agree with you Devo.

------------------
Trample the Weak,
Hurdle the Dead.
 
Good topic and hard call but I'd also have to say Dench, who should have been fullbcak of the century. Nonetheless it's hard to think of a fullback who intimidated players more than Mick Martyn has over the last decade.
 
David Dench is a nose in front of Mick. I think David was a more creative player. Although Mick is great to watch as he is so strong. Mick is much a more effective player than Silvagni. Silvangi never managed to hold Lockett. Silvangi just stands out more because of his bow legs. The umpires love him.
 
Looking at our team of the century, I couldn't help but wonder whom you all think is the better full back - Martyn or Dench. I've had this arguement with my old man many of times, and we can't figure it out. Given that Martyn has played on 3 of the best full forwards of all time (Dunstall / Lockett / Ablett) and beaten them all compared with Dench (McKenna / Hudson / Wade who were all champion players but in my opinion not in the same class as the 90s ff), I think he was the better full back. What do you think??


It's Dench.

There is no argument.

Dench was elite.
 
It's Dench.

There is no argument.

Dench was elite.

Dude, that post you replied to is 12 years old.

Edit: Actually that wasn't your first alias was it and you just forgot?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Both fantastic full backs. Dench changed the way full backs played the game. Always ready to leave his forward and run booting the ball into the forward line. Sensational full back. Dench wins this battle. Must say that I am a huge Mick fan too and he was an excellent full back. But Dench wins this one.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Who's the better full back - Dench or Martyn??

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top