Bryce Gibbs & Marc Murphy

[kruddler]

Why is it when a player or players are critised all the politically correct brigade come running? It's like I've directly insulted your mother.

FFS, my take on it is they're hacks. You don't have to agree, but I find it amazing that people like you are so accepting of mediocrity. But hey, whatever rocks your boat...

Not sure what i said led to that response.

My take on it is, if we get offered something good - bye bye.
However, don't let them go for nothing. Cash in, not hand out.

[Juddkreuzer]

When Judd came he was leading a very inexperienced mid field, which contained the likes of Murphy and Gibbs. Judd got smashed by the opposition with little support but being the superstar he was, he was able to impact on games irregardless. Now Murphy and Gibbs find themselves the two most targeted by opposition coaches yet they still mange to have an impact. Murphy is killing all comers in the JP medal. A commentator made the remark a while ago that he had emerged from Judds shadow and was now a true leader in his own right.

Dangerfield isn't the greatest set shot for goal.

Gibbs plays the game in a manner that could be viewed as indolent, where in fact he works his backside off. He has the ability to create play and reads the game as good as anyone. As for effort, who can forget Simmo's 250th where he spewed at the end of the game.
Both these guys played with injuries (and Cripps isn't 100%) in a team with 7 teenagers, on a ground most had never played on against a team in red hot form. Kreuzers absence should not be understated either.

[townsendcalling]

When Judd came he was leading a very inexperienced mid field, which contained the likes of Murphy and Gibbs. Judd got smashed by the opposition with little support but being the superstar he was, he was able to impact on games irregardless. Now Murphy and Gibbs find themselves the two most targeted by opposition coaches yet they still mange to have an impact. Murphy is killing all comers in the JP medal. A commentator made the remark a while ago that he had emerged from Judds shadow and was now a true leader in his own right.

Dangerfield isn't the greatest set shot for goal.

Gibbs plays the game in a manner that could be viewed as indolent, where in fact he works his backside off. He has the ability to create play and reads the game as good as anyone. As for effort, who can forget Simmo's 250th where he spewed at the end of the game.
Both these guys played with injuries (and Cripps isn't 100%) in a team with 7 teenagers, on a ground most had never played on against a team in red hot form. Kreuzers absence should not be understated either.

X2. (I wonder how my old mate Spanner would have assessed Craig Bradley's career??)

[Gointocarlton]

X2. (I wonder how my old mate Spanner would have assessed Craig Bradley's career??)

Can I ask what similarities you think there are btw Gibbs, Murph and Sir Braddles? I personally think there are none. Sir Craig was a gut running machine who wore his opponents into the ground.

[Spanner_smf2_import2]

X2. (I wonder how my old mate Spanner would have assessed Craig Bradley's career??)

You mean the guy who couldn't help but hit a target 99% of the time? Why would I have a problem with him? Why would I have a problem with his gut running that was amazing? Why would I have a problem with his ability to kick a goal when required and under pressure?

Do you even understand what this thread is about?  :-\

[PaulP]

You mean the guy who couldn't help but hit a target 99% of the time? Why would I have a problem with him? Why would I have a problem with his gut running that was amazing? Why would I have a problem with his ability to kick a goal when required and under pressure?

Do you even understand what this thread is about?  :-\

In the very first post that opens this thread, you make a few references to your 2 favorite players being soft coc@s. So was Braddles. I recall many at the time of his career noting his aversion to the contest and physical contact. That's not to diminish his many other fine attributes.

[Baggers]

I still see Murphy as a midfielder; his main problem has always been the evolution of bigger bodied midfielders who crunch him at every opportunity.

Yep, which is why I'd like to see him as a small forward, to extend his career! If he was 192cm and 92 kgs or thereabouts, he'd be a gun, but he aint. He is, however, a 'little gun'.

[Spanner_smf2_import2]

Now Murphy and Gibbs find themselves the two most targeted by opposition coaches yet they still mange to have an impact.

Are we watching the same two turnover merchants? Sorry, you must be only watching the pre-game warm up when Gibbs hits all targets and Murphy obtains a spine.

A commentator made the remark a while ago that he had emerged from Judds shadow and was now a true leader in his own right.

Well if a commentator said it, it must be true...  :-\ Would it be by chance Dwayne Russell? There's the fountain of knowledge in all things football right there.  :

[Spanner_smf2_import2]

In the very first post that opens this thread, you make a few references to your 2 favorite players being soft coc@s. So was Braddles. I recall many at the time of his career noting his aversion to the contest and physical contact. That's not to diminish his many other fine attributes.

Bradley may not have been the toughest player out there, but he made up for it by running all day and creating options and was an elite kick.

[cookie2]

Yep, which is why I'd like to see him as a small forward, to extend his career! If he was 192cm and 92 kgs or thereabouts, he'd be a gun, but he aint. He is, however, a 'little gun'.

Can he be our little gun till our big gun comes along?