SA Footy

Was this the best Centrals team of its six flag wins?
Is this one of the best ever?
I'm only talking about one season teams, not overall dynasties.

Great question.

Bloody close and I reckon the answer might be YES.

If only the 2002 side won the flag as they were the best dogs side I have seen. But a 20-2 record this season is hard to beat...

smac wrote:Great question.

Bloody close and I reckon the answer might be YES.

If only the 2002 side won the flag as they were the best dogs side I have seen. But a 20-2 record this season is hard to beat...

I agree.
The less losses you have, the better the record.
The 2002 side didn't beat Norwood and put in a shocker on GF day.
The 2007 model beat everybody easily.

Bigger question...why are Dogs fans posting on here?

Id be no where near a PC if the Bays got up*

Dutchy wrote:Bigger question...why are Dogs fans posting on here?

Id be no where near a PC if the Bays got up*

Still getting the kids to bed mate, cannot imagine a 4 year old after a GF day...

A 2 year old is screaming for her bed and the 9 year old is about to get a smack in the side of the noggin to put him to bed.

Then I've got til sun up to get back home!

Dutchy wrote:Bigger question...why are Dogs fans posting on here?

Id be no where near a PC if the Bays got up*

If the Bays ever get up again, I reckon I'll end up getting escorted to bed by a handful of PCs...

In terms of dynasties or eras of sustained success this has to be right up there

Even more of an effort considering the player turnover since 2000

Centrals are a credit to the SANFL and rightly the benchmark

Pseudo wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Bigger question...why are Dogs fans posting on here?

Id be no where near a PC if the Bays got up*

If the Bays ever get up again, I reckon I'll end up getting escorted to bed by a handful of PCs...

LOL...I actually dread the day the Bays win their next flag, I wasnt legal drinking age at the last one....it will be an ugly hangover....

the Dogs first premiership team is very special

just to break through that mental barrier to get the monkey off the clubs back, so many of us doubted whether the club would ever win a flag, it took a huge amount of belief from the players to get the first Premiership on the board

For mine based on this year. They seem SO even across the Board. Have one or two stand outs, but generally all good.
No weak links are visible...

Pseudo wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Bigger question...why are Dogs fans posting on here?

Id be no where near a PC if the Bays got up*

If the Bays ever get up again, I reckon I'll end up getting escorted to bed by a handful of PCs...

PCs = police constables
PCs = pretty chicks

which is it pseudo ?

We are nowhere near as classy a team as earlier versions. We make far too many errors with our disposal. An earlier Central team would have beaten North today by over 20 goals.
The reason I am posting is that I am back in Mildura, wishing I was at Elizabeth though!
Cheers

bulldogproud wrote:We are nowhere near as classy a team as earlier versions. We make far too many errors with our disposal. An earlier Central team would have beaten North today by over 20 goals.
The reason I am posting is that I am back in Mildura, wishing I was at Elizabeth though!
Cheers

Crikey Proudy - they're words few of the population has EVER spokey!!!

ST...

It is hard to compare teams but the 2000 team was special for the reasons stated above.

I think the 2007 team had the best midfield that I have seen from a doggies squad. The defence was solid particularly when Schell was at CHB nut I'm not sure about the attack - not a lot of goals were kicked.

doggies4eva wrote:I'm not sure about the attack - not a lot of goals were kicked.

Have to dispute this - we kicked under 100 points about 6 times this year

Amazing amount of roving power in this team compared to previous models and Schell's marking was vital at half back. Symes might be the most damaging running type midfielder we've had but for mine the 2004 model wins out. Bello, Hopwood, Arnott, Healy, Steinberner, Cochrane, Hay, Scoullar, Cowan, Aufderheide and Currie compared with Obst, Hayes, Symes, Grima, Callinan, Lawry, Dutschke, Griffin, Havelberg, O'Sullivan and Slattery. Perhaps splitting hairs between the two, but I think the consistency of the earlier group would be better while guys like the Gowans, Slade and a couple others were a bit more effective in that season IMHO.

That list goes to show exactly how well we've replaced our losses though, don't they?

Grahaml wrote:Amazing amount of roving power in this team compared to previous models and Schell's marking was vital at half back. Symes might be the most damaging running type midfielder we've had but for mine the 2004 model wins out. Bello, Hopwood, Arnott, Healy, Steinberner, Cochrane, Hay, Scoullar, Cowan, Aufderheide and Currie compared with Obst, Hayes, Symes, Grima, Callinan, Lawry, Dutschke, Griffin, Havelberg, O'Sullivan and Slattery. Perhaps splitting hairs between the two, but I think the consistency of the earlier group would be better while guys like the Gowans, Slade and a couple others were a bit more effective in that season IMHO.

That list goes to show exactly how well we've replaced our losses though, don't they?

And doesn't your last line just sum it up perfectly and that is the secret to the on going dominance!

I also think that our forward line fired a bit more in those days. Heals could always be counted on for important goals and having Schelly up forward (we could allow this as we had a dominant backline even without him) added a fair bit of potency.