-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Franklin
- Thread starter Ghost of Punt Road
- Start date
A
acatman
Guest
Buddy, with his pace, long kicking, and "look at me" ego is an exciting player to watch, and the media of course go along for the ride. He is a match winner, also though a match loser. So perhaps NOT the great player, moreso a very good player IMHO. What i see is a bloke who hasnt improved his game in 3 or so years, still no right foot, still a flawed kicking style. Perhaps if he were to put the ago away and work on his game he could be a champion, i just dont think these sort of players though ever do that.
acatman said:
This critique could so easily be lifted from a Matthew Richardson post at a similiar stage of his career. Franklin will never change, although like Richardson when he becomes a vetera, his ability to read the game and play brilliantly within his limitations (assumptions of course) might afford him the description 'great player'. Plus being a premiership player and being surrounded by seriously classly players gives him an advantage that Richardson never had. Still wish he was a Tiger.
spook said:
The big difference between Richo and Buddy is that Buddy has played just about his whole career in a top team and Richo played in one of the worst teams of all time for his whole career. Swap those around and it is not hard to guess who would be rated the better player.
23.21.159 said:
He often kicks goals in junk time, the majority of his famous 13 against North in Tassie where after the Hawks had already put the game to bed.
The greatest players I've seen all had the ability to produce their best footy when the whips were really cracking and the game was in the balance, guys like Hart, Carey and Ablett senior had it all over Buddy in this regard, they were often the reason their team won. To compare Buddy to these greats is an insult to them in my opinion.
SAF said:
Pretty harsh I reckon. Avg goals in finals (min. 10 finals):
Player AvgG Fn
-------------------------
Todd, Ron 5.00 11
McKenna, Peter 4.18 11
Ablett, Gary 4.00 16
Vallence, Harry 3.79 14
Dunstall, Jason 3.71 21
Pratt, Bob 3.70 10
Franklin, Lance 3.67 12
Kernahan, Stephen 3.61 18
Coventry, Gordon 3.58 31
Wade, Doug 3.56 18
Even on Saturday, with Roughhead, Rioli, Lewis & Puopolo - all of whom kicked at least 24 goals for the season - contributing zero to the score, he was the only player standing between Sydney and the flag. He was the obvious bogey man, yet the Swans couldn't prevent him getting it 24 times. Yeah he missed some gettable shots and if he kicks 5.2, the Hawks probably win and Franklin gets the Norm Smith. It's a fine line, but not correct to say he didn't stand up when it counted IMO.
On the other hand Roughead had a putrid game - matched against a proppy ruckman who had to be subbed off, and a rugby player...
If he could mark like Carey or Richardson he'd be the greatest ever, fuggedabowdit. He's the greatest 6'6" ground level player of all time for sure. He'll be one of Hawthorn's greatest at the end, but all time it's not clear yet. If he had kicked 6 on Sat and got them up it'd be a very different story today.
SAF said:
To be fair, against North junk time was about 15 minutes into the first quarter and beyond.
Buddy is a star...no two ways about it. He has kicked clutch goals in big games plenty of times before...his two in the third quarter on the weekend were beauties. He doesn't kick those they aren't even in the game.
so 10pts is apparantly the difference from an above avg, great player on his day type compared to a complete matchwinning superstar.... :
The guys a superstar. flawed, but a superstar no doubt. he lifts eeryone around him. When swans had the run, he just couldn't get his hands on the pill. each time he did, he killed richards, LRT in my opinion. his teammates just couldn't give him the ball. THat goal, where there was no one in his F50 and he took a grab, turned and belted it through from 50 in one motion was just class and arrogance.
Media does go over the top, no doubt. He gets more leeway from critics on his kicking than richo ever did but he is a matchwinner, that is not in question.
The guys a superstar. flawed, but a superstar no doubt. he lifts eeryone around him. When swans had the run, he just couldn't get his hands on the pill. each time he did, he killed richards, LRT in my opinion. his teammates just couldn't give him the ball. THat goal, where there was no one in his F50 and he took a grab, turned and belted it through from 50 in one motion was just class and arrogance.
Media does go over the top, no doubt. He gets more leeway from critics on his kicking than richo ever did but he is a matchwinner, that is not in question.
I'm not denying that Buddy's best is outstanding and his is one of the best players going around. My issue is that he doesn't consistently produce it. His worst days are not even close to what a superstar should produce. Superstar forwards of bygone eras were much more consistent and just as influential when they were running hot, in my opinion Buddy is not as good as guys like Hart and Carey were.
My other main annoyance is that so many in the media talk of him in god-like awe and rarely point out anything he does wrong. Whereas Richo was very similar and always painted as the villan with his flaws highlighted every time he made a mistake. The reality is that the key difference has been that Buddy has enjoyed the benfits of having a top team around him wheres Richo never did.
My other main annoyance is that so many in the media talk of him in god-like awe and rarely point out anything he does wrong. Whereas Richo was very similar and always painted as the villan with his flaws highlighted every time he made a mistake. The reality is that the key difference has been that Buddy has enjoyed the benfits of having a top team around him wheres Richo never did.
SAF said:
A lot of truth re the Richo comparison. I don't think Franklin's stinkers are as bad as early Richo's, though.
In his last 100 games, he's averaged 6.5 scoring shots per game. Brown's next on 4.96, Jack Riewoldt 4th on 3.96. Richo averaged 5.39 in his best ever sequence of 100 games. In this era of strangled forward lines, he actually produces very consistently.
He is head and shoulders the most dangerous player in the competition.
Jack would have just as many scoring shots in his last hundred games if he'd played for the Hawks.
Getting scoring shots is nowhere near as impressive as getting goals.
Jack may even have as many scoring shots playing for richmond if he went for goal from every conceivable angle inside sixty metres.
Getting scoring shots is nowhere near as impressive as getting goals.
Jack may even have as many scoring shots playing for richmond if he went for goal from every conceivable angle inside sixty metres.
You can not be spraying shots out of bounds on the full from forty metres out in grand finals.
The sense of relief a player feels at seeing their opponent hook a kick that far out cannot be understated. You go from full pressure, to none.
That mental edge is paramount in grand finals.
It's criminal that some people will call Franklin the best player in the league, when he can't even do the absolute most fundamental part of football, i.e. run and kick in a straight line.
The sense of relief a player feels at seeing their opponent hook a kick that far out cannot be understated. You go from full pressure, to none.
That mental edge is paramount in grand finals.
It's criminal that some people will call Franklin the best player in the league, when he can't even do the absolute most fundamental part of football, i.e. run and kick in a straight line.
