Bombertalk

This guy lost me when he admitted he is a Geelong supporter and doesnt watch Fletcher as much as Scarlett.

Sadly, all credibility lost.

Perhaps when Scarlett (admittedly a dead set champ) is playing at the same level as Fletcher is when he is 34 I will be more likely to give Scarlett the votes.

Just out of interest how did Scarlett go on Kernahan, Modra, Lockett, Sumich, Ablett Snr when he was 17? They say Fletcher hasnt always had to take on the key FF - pfft!


Pick 1: Fletcher or Scarlett?
Jon Anderson From: Herald Sun May 26, 2010 6:35PM
BOTH of them are champions, but who would you rather: Dustin Fletcher or Matthew Scarlett? Find out who Ando rates as No.1, and have your say from 9am tomorrow.
DUSTIN Fletcher and Matthew Scarlett are two of the greatest defenders to have played the game. That’s a statement that only the ignorant could argue with.

But who’s best? Unless you are a rabid Essendon or Geelong supporter, it isn’t an easy decision. Some claim Fletcher has often played in other roles away from full back but the facts are he’s normally been deep in defence on a key player.

There careers are remarkably similar other than Fletcher having been at the caper for six years longer. Both are sons of fine players with the same clubs, Fletcher being taken back in the days when father/son selections were made at the end of the normal draft. Scarlett went five years later, clubs had to give up a third round pick for a father/son, but both were incredibly cheap given the players they have turned out.

Dustin Fletcher

Age, height and weight: 34, 198cm, 93kg

Games, goals: 321, 66

Playing honours: B&F in 2000, 2nd in 2007, 2009, 3rd in 2006, All-Australian in 2000 and 2007, Premiership sides in 1993 and 2000, International Rules in 2005-2006, Pre-season Premierships in 1994 and 2000.

Draft history: Taken as a father/son selection with Pick 125 in the 1992 National Draft.

Strengths: Can play on talls or smalls, quicks or slows, dinosaurs or mosquitos.

Weaknesses: Despite his height has never been able to add much weight to his 93kg frame, meaning he can be susceptible to being out-bodied as he was at times last Saturday night by Jack Riewoldt.

Matthew Scarlett

Age, height, weight: 30, 192cm, 94kg

Games, goals: 232, 16

Playing honours: B&F in 2003, 2nd in 2001, 2004, 2005. All-Australian in 2003, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009. Premiership sides in 2007, 2009. International Rules in 2002-2003, Pre-season Premierships in 2006, 2009

Draft history: Taken as a father/son selection with Pick 45 in the 1997 National Draft.

Strengths: Quick, clever, good with hand and foot, excellent decision maker. Gets back when he has to, dashes when he can.

Weaknesses: At 192cm isn’t overly tall and has occasionally been monstered by the likes of Jonathan Brown.

VERDICT: Can you have a dead heat? Not in this caper so I would go with Scarlett because he appeals as the more traditional full back. Five times he has been named All-Australia with Fletcher selected twice, once at full back and once on interchange. As a Geelong supporter I have seen more of Scarlett and as such have a greater appreciation of his abilities. But the more I see of Fletcher, the better he gets. He averages more rebounds than Scarlett, more disposals and more contested possessions. Hey, but if you lost the toss in picking a schoolyard team, you wouldn’t be too worried.

Far out. Wonder what the Herald Scum pays these peanuts to come up with this guff...

Ha, it is one man's opinion against another...Windy you are just have a cry because he doesn't happen to agree with your OPINION. Would you like a tissue, princess?

Old mate wrote:Ha, it is one man's opinion against another...Windy you are just have a cry because he doesn't happen to agree with your OPINION. Would you like a tissue, princess?

Out of rehab Old Mate - well done.

Read my post again (slowly does it)

1) I have acknowledged that Scarlett is a champion
2) I have questioned the credentials of the reporter to make an impartial judgement when in his review of the 2 players, he admits that he is a Geelong supporter who doesnt really get to see Fletcher play as much. In the live blog on the Herald Sun this morning, he again confirms that because he is a Geelong supporter, he naturally prefers Geelong players
3) I havent actually stated which player I think is better? (I actually think they are differnt types of players and its unfair to make a direct comparison)
4) I did however state that if Scarlet continues to play at his/or Fletchers current level when he is 34, he would get my vote???

Perhaps reading the post would help, I accept your apologies in advance

Anderson's summary on Fletch overlooks his greatest asset. I have never seen a guy who can consistently hit a target 60 m away with such accuracy. He is so good at this that it is now accepted as normal and this great skill tends to be overlooked. I would go as far as saying he is the best kick of a football I have ever seen.

So if DumbFck Anderson is looking for something to seperate these great fullbacks, that in my opinion puts Gadget on top.

Why doesn't he just stick to drink driving...something he's good at.

Fletch any day. As previously mentioned Fletcher has played on far better quality opposition than what Scarlett has played against. I've never seen Scarlett do any of things that Fletch has done. Goal line spoils springs to me, how many times have we seen that throughout his career. They both have 2 flags. I am not saying Scarlett isn't a great defender but nowhere near Fletcher. For a complete 'defender' Dustin is the man. Scarlett is good defensive mark and spoil. Doesn't do much else. Only from my observation.

Out of rehab Old Mate - well done.

Read my post again (slowly does it)

1) I have acknowledged that Scarlett is a champion
2) I have questioned the credentials of the reporter to make an impartial judgement when in his review of the 2 players, he admits that he is a Geelong supporter who doesnt really get to see Fletcher play as much. In the live blog on the Herald Sun this morning, he again confirms that because he is a Geelong supporter, he naturally prefers Geelong players
3) I havent actually stated which player I think is better? (I actually think they are differnt types of players and its unfair to make a direct comparison)
4) I did however state that if Scarlet continues to play at his/or Fletchers current level when he is 34, he would get my vote???

Perhaps reading the post would help, I accept your apologies in advance[/quote]


Don't hold your breath, mate...an apology ain't comin' your way.

He actually praises Fletcher more than people like you can glean. If you could read between the lines you would see that his tribute is actually quite a glowing one because, as a Geelong man, he is naturally biased. And yet, he still finds the time to conclude his argument by listing the attributes of Fletcher (some may call this a wry endorsement): "But the more I see of Fletcher, the better he gets. He averages more rebounds than Scarlett, more disposals and more contested possessions. Hey, but if you lost the toss in picking a schoolyard team, you wouldn’t be too worried."

Me thinks you are just having a whinge because he didn't "pick" Fletcher...you are far too one-eyed, my friend

The argument against Fletch that he doesn't take the best defender is tired and wrong.
Fletch always took the biggest, strongest and most dangerous of forwards when there was an oversupply of great forwards. He had probably played 200+ games before he started this late career role change down back.
Wellman was the one that usually took the third tall and was able to play the backline general role. It's only in recent years that Fletch has taken that Wellman role, but he has also manned the gun forwards. He gets the jobs that need to be done and done well.
His spoiling and kicking are second to none.
Scarlett is good, no doubt, but I think Fletch earned bigger stripes in his formative years and his longevity and perpetual improvement is almost unsurpassed.
Scarlett is 5 seasons behind him.

Windy_Hill wrote:

Old mate wrote:Ha, it is one man's opinion against another...Windy you are just have a cry because he doesn't happen to agree with your OPINION. Would you like a tissue, princess?

Out of rehab Old Mate - well done.

Read my post again (slowly does it)

1) I have acknowledged that Scarlett is a champion
2) I have questioned the credentials of the reporter to make an impartial judgement when in his review of the 2 players, he admits that he is a Geelong supporter who doesnt really get to see Fletcher play as much. In the live blog on the Herald Sun this morning, he again confirms that because he is a Geelong supporter, he naturally prefers Geelong players
3) I havent actually stated which player I think is better? (I actually think they are differnt types of players and its unfair to make a direct comparison)
4) I did however state that if Scarlet continues to play at his/or Fletchers current level when he is 34, he would get my vote???

Perhaps reading the post would help, I accept your apologies in advance

f*** me Windy, the bloke has admitted that he is a Geelong supporter, but he has virtually called it a draw. You'd be worried if he had of flat-out picked Scarlett. He was just being honest and said that he would probably choose Scarlett because he see's more of him... Simply put Windy, BIG F****** DEAL!

Most of the people commenting on the article have favoured Fletcher which is a surprise.

Old mate wrote:Out of rehab Old Mate - well done.

Read my post again (slowly does it)

1) I have acknowledged that Scarlett is a champion
2) I have questioned the credentials of the reporter to make an impartial judgement when in his review of the 2 players, he admits that he is a Geelong supporter who doesnt really get to see Fletcher play as much. In the live blog on the Herald Sun this morning, he again confirms that because he is a Geelong supporter, he naturally prefers Geelong players
3) I havent actually stated which player I think is better? (I actually think they are differnt types of players and its unfair to make a direct comparison)
4) I did however state that if Scarlet continues to play at his/or Fletchers current level when he is 34, he would get my vote???

Perhaps reading the post would help, I accept your apologies in advance

Don't hold your breath, mate...an apology ain't comin' your way.

He actually praises Fletcher more than people like you can glean. If you could read between the lines you would see that his tribute is actually quite a glowing one because, as a Geelong man, he is naturally biased. And yet, he still finds the time to conclude his argument by listing the attributes of Fletcher (some may call this a wry endorsement): "But the more I see of Fletcher, the better he gets. He averages more rebounds than Scarlett, more disposals and more contested possessions. Hey, but if you lost the toss in picking a schoolyard team, you wouldn’t be too worried."

Me thinks you are just having a whinge because he didn't "pick" Fletcher...you are far too one-eyed, my friend[/quote]


No I am actually leaning towards Scarlett - once again, read my post

Gimps wrote:

Windy_Hill wrote:

Old mate wrote:Ha, it is one man's opinion against another...Windy you are just have a cry because he doesn't happen to agree with your OPINION. Would you like a tissue, princess?

Out of rehab Old Mate - well done.

Read my post again (slowly does it)

1) I have acknowledged that Scarlett is a champion
2) I have questioned the credentials of the reporter to make an impartial judgement when in his review of the 2 players, he admits that he is a Geelong supporter who doesnt really get to see Fletcher play as much. In the live blog on the Herald Sun this morning, he again confirms that because he is a Geelong supporter, he naturally prefers Geelong players
3) I havent actually stated which player I think is better? (I actually think they are differnt types of players and its unfair to make a direct comparison)
4) I did however state that if Scarlet continues to play at his/or Fletchers current level when he is 34, he would get my vote???

Perhaps reading the post would help, I accept your apologies in advance

f*** me Windy, the bloke has admitted that he is a Geelong supporter, but he has virtually called it a draw. You'd be worried if he had of flat-out picked Scarlett. He was just being honest and said that he would probably choose Scarlett because he see's more of him... Simply put Windy, BIG F****** DEAL!

No, he picked Scarlett - no draw not whinging either. Just think an article likes this loses credibility when the writer admits he has a bias towards one player

Can someone explain to me how the commentators of last nights game can see Fletch battling Hall at one end and Lake getting cheap licks and being run around at the other and say. With Scarlett's injury Lake is a shoe in for FB in the AA team?

Seriously WTF?!

BTW i saw the typo and I'm leaving it there!

It is really very simple Sismis...The AA selectors have a predisposition against anyone wearing a black geurnsey with a red sash...

Doesn't matter how good our players are travelling, they will not be selected and half the side are picked on reputation alone...

Lloydy named the best five full backs of his era at half time of the Geelong/Melbourne telecast today:

1. Dustin Fletcher
2. Matthew Scarlett
3. Steven Silvagni
4. Max Hudghton
5. Mal Michael

Tim Lane virtually accused him of being biased but Lloydy answered that it was because of Fletch's versatility in being able to play on different sized players and still be an attacking presence.

He also said that he would take Scarlett as first option if the main criterion was stopping an opponent from kicking goals.

I don't think Lane like SOS being dropped to third on the list.

I was surprised he didn't mention Mick Martyn as he always gave Lloyd a hard time in his first 4-5 years.

Not surprised he didn't mention Mick Martyn. He was a tough defender, but not a shade on the 5 Lloydy nominated...

swoodley wrote:Lloydy named the best five full backs of his era at half time of the Geelong/Melbourne telecast today:

1. Dustin Fletcher
2. Matthew Scarlett
3. Steven Silvagni
4. Max Hudghton
5. Mal Michael

Tim Lane virtually accused him of being biased but Lloydy answered that it was because of Fletch's versatility in being able to play on different sized players and still be an attacking presence.

He also said that he would take Scarlett as first option if the main criterion was stopping an opponent from kicking goals.

I don't think Lane like SOS being dropped to third on the list.

I was surprised he didn't mention Mick Martyn as he always gave Lloyd a hard time in his first 4-5 years.

Question I have is Lloyd qualified to comment on Fletcher as he never actually played on him? Sure, he would have a s good an idea as any other punter from simply watching the great man from the other end of the field.

Fletch was all over Hall, beating him time and again in the one on one's. Hall got 5, but I think Hurley had him for at least 2 of them.

Hall got a couple by sitting out the back of a pack as well. Fletch did well and stopped Hall quite alot when Hall was the only Dogs player inside 50.