A topic stolen from the Bradford board to pass the off season.

Baiscally you name 2 players and give an opinion as to who you thought was better. The only 2 rules are 1/ You need to have seem them both play and 2/ they're players who played in the same position.

I'll start off with-

Brian Carney vs Brett Dallas

I would give this to Carney literally by a bugs todge. He could break games open with trys that to me his talents sometimes made you think he may not be able to score. He was fast without being lightning but his sheer determination to get to the try line just seemed to keep the chasing players at bay. He had his injury problems but so did BD so that probably makes it a fair comparison. My main memories of Carney are his 2 pearlers in the play offs at Leeds, a stunning try at Saints and a tackle on Anthony Sullivan when he was walking in the corner he had no right to pull off.

As for Dallas he was top class, solid as a rock and very very quick. I can't say anything negative about him other then like Carney he picked up more then his fair share of injuries. I think the reason I went for Carney was just that he scored a couple more 'big game blinders'.

I'd agree with everything you said there.

Dallas was the better player.

Oil spouts out of Dallas
Gobblygook spouts out of Carney
Take your pick Both quality players

I would always have wanted Dallas in the team over Carney, the only possible exception being late 2003 when Carney was exceptional.

The harsh truth though is that a few flashy tries in and around that period has fans remembering Carney as far better than he was. In reality, he was a flash in the pan. He was very poor defensively in particular.

Dallas.

Was a much better overall player IMO, Carney was great in attack, but lacked in defence a lot of the time, other than the occasional miracle tackle.

His achievements down under can't be ignored either.

Offiah over either imho.

Carney ruined his reputation with me during that last season of "injuries" when all he wanted to do was play for GB and go with his Johns mates to Aus.

Not really a player with the team's best interests at heart, therefore it has to be Dallas. He was given little to no service in his last few years and still never let us down.

Dallas all day long

Whilst i would agree with this, Dallas did score some gamechangers too, the challenge cup semi of 2004 springs to mind

I'd agree with that. Carney came to the game late and had some raw talent that allowed him to score some great tries but Dallas also had the talent and he also knew how to play the game.

Did not see enough of either "Live" to make a reasoned judgement.

Do know i could watch the tries both scored all day long .

Lockers vs Farrell (Andy)


Strangely I'd go for Lockers due to the amount of service he has given. The lad took a lot of flack from fans under Millward/Noble but he has silenced the critics under Madge. Really nice guy and to get a testimonial at such a youngish age is fantastic. Plus Farrell only did 5 seasons (I think)

Dallas v Carney

Dallas easy, people forget how bad Carney was for his first 2 seasons at Wigan, awful under a high ball and couldn't defend, he did improve significantly but Dallas was consistent since the day he came. To say Dallas is "a legend" is absoulutely laughable though, just because he put his boots on the pitch! Dallas was a good winger, and he was consistent, but not even in the same league as Robinson, Offiah and even Richards.

Lockers v Farrell

Its tough one, id still say Faz, just, he was the perfect leader, he won us games single handedly, something Lockers is yet to do, Lockers is a world class player but he's no Farrell im afraid.