Peter Canavan

Started by corcaioch, November 13, 2009, 06:05:40 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

redhugh

Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 16, 2009, 08:12:46 PM
Quote from: Sandino on November 16, 2009, 02:24:49 PM
I would like to comment on this issue. As others have said it's a pretty pointless discussion much like the team of the decade debate. Yet is a topic that will be chatted about in bars on high stools for years to come, at least until someone better that Frank and Peter come along. I have had the pleasure of seeing both men play, in the flesh so to speak, so I feel that I have the right to comment. For me Peter was the best player I have ever seen at least on a par with Jacko.  Fitz was a great player also but to my mind he was no way near as good as Matt Connor. To say one player is/was a great player should not imply that another was anything less that a great player. Comparisons are sometimes foolish!

Well Red Hugh, as you have seen both players I certainly think your opinion is very valid. While I don't agree with it, it is of course a matter of opinion. But others who never saw Frank seem to get very angry when I suggest he was better than Peter, and I too have seen both players.


Whatchew talkin' 'bout Willis??You taliking about me or Sandino?

Zapatista

Quote from: Sandino on November 16, 2009, 02:24:49 PM
Comparisons are sometimes foolish!

In comparison they are sometimes wise ;)

Hardy

#32
The standard of boot lacing in this country is appalling, from what I can see.

redhugh

As is the standard of bootlegging unfortunately.

longrunsthefox

Quote from: redhugh on November 16, 2009, 08:17:14 PM
Quote from: longrunsthefox on November 16, 2009, 08:12:46 PM
Quote from: Sandino on November 16, 2009, 02:24:49 PM
I would like to comment on this issue. As others have said it's a pretty pointless discussion much like the team of the decade debate. Yet is a topic that will be chatted about in bars on high stools for years to come, at least until someone better that Frank and Peter come along. I have had the pleasure of seeing both men play, in the flesh so to speak, so I feel that I have the right to comment. For me Peter was the best player I have ever seen at least on a par with Jacko.  Fitz was a great player also but to my mind he was no way near as good as Matt Connor. To say one player is/was a great player should not imply that another was anything less that a great player. Comparisons are sometimes foolish!

Well Red Hugh, as you have seen both players I certainly think your opinion is very valid. While I don't agree with it, it is of course a matter of opinion. But others who never saw Frank seem to get very angry when I suggest he was better than Peter, and I too have seen both players.


Whatchew talkin' 'bout Willis??You taliking about me or Sandino?

Oops! Ure rite-Sandino. I've corrected it.

BennyHarp

I was unfortunate to miss Franks best years and only really saw him play in 1984 but i must say he was an absolute joy to watch! I always remember my dad telling me that it was impossible to give Frank a bad pass!! But i agree with Fox in the respect that unless you have seen both in there prime it is impossible to pass judgement on which was best! All i can say is that Peter was far and away the best footballer i have ever seen grace a football pitch, but i say that knowing that i didnt see enough of Frank to do him justice!
That was never a square ball!!

LeoMc

These sorts of arguments are pointless.
Would Peter have survived the more physical games of the 70's?
Would Frank have the commitment to make the team of today?
Would Jack O have stood out with the fitness levels of today?
Would Maurice Fitz have walked onto Kerry teams of earlier years where there was less emphasis on work rate and more on the individual?




ONeill

Would Maurice have the knackers to walk into the opposing team's showers and deck someone?
I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames.

oakleafgael

Quote from: LeoMc on November 17, 2009, 10:13:56 PM
These sorts of arguments are pointless.
Would Peter have survived the more physical games of the 70's?
Would Frank have the commitment to make the team of today?
Would Jack O have stood out with the fitness levels of today?
Would Maurice Fitz have walked onto Kerry teams of earlier years where there was less emphasis on work rate and more on the individual?

He would have revelled in it. People talk about poor wee Peter getting his retaliation in first but he was as much a sinner as sinned against.

He is as good a footballer as I have seen in the flesh.

stephenite

Quote from: ONeill on November 17, 2009, 11:17:50 PM
Would Maurice have the knackers to walk into the opposing team's showers and deck someone?

Knackers? Quite an apt choice of word given the content of the rest of the sentence

muppet

Peter was a grate plare.....
MWWSI 2017

corcaioch

Quote from: EC Unique on November 14, 2009, 12:21:39 PM
He done it consistently for about 14 years for club and county. He stared for Tyrone in 95 scoring all but one of Tyrone's points that day and 10 years later starred again in the all Ireland final scoring a superb goal!!  The man was a genius that has no equal. Some players came close ie Maurice Fitz, SON,etc but did not equal him in consistency.

Maurice Fitz but not Mick O'Connell or Pat Spillane?

DCR

Was once present during a Canavan v McGuigan debate in an Ardboe hostlery and a McGuigan disciple's final (and he felt defining) question was "could Peter Canavan play football when he was drunk"?

rosskarr

  DCR, could I suggest you remove this as it is offensive although I do get your point.

cookstownblue

Why should he remove it, he simply stated what he heard in a debate?