The T-birds and the Scorpions, or, Hird vs. Buckley

As we head towards another ANZAC day showdown, I remembered watching the Monday night game between Collingwood and Adelaide of round one this year, and seeing the difference between Nathan Buckley and the rest of his team. I was reminded that ‘Bucks’ is still a pretty handy player. Age and injury are catching up with him a bit, but at his FIGJAMing best, he was probably one of the top 5 players in the AFL.

Similarly, James Hird has been slowed by injury in recent times, but returned last week, making the game look as ever as it ever was for him, just in time to reclaim the captaincy this week. And so as ANZAC day approaches, and talking about where Buckley’s legacy stands in the grand scheme of things, the question was raised; who is/was better, Nathan Buckley or James Hird?

Hird was used as the counterpoint to Buckley because, for some reason, it feels as if their careers are connected, like they have something in common, some kind of bond I couldn’t quite put my finger on. I emailed the question to Mrs. Watson and received this reply:

Hird heads the T-Birds: has great driving skills, but he also likes to sing and dance while working on the engine; he's flashy, but not so confident to be arrogant. Buckley heads the Scorpions; sure, the guy knows how to drive well enough, but he's all about intimidation - and sharing blood. Tell me more, tell me more... Hird has got it all, skills and smarts. Buckley just ain't that great, but no-one is brave enough to tell him.

Exactly! Hird and Buckley make such great counterpoints to each other because they have the feel of natural enemies, of cross-town rivals, of dopey, 1960’s, musical, gang-leaders.

Mrs. Watson had put me on the right track, but it’s more than that; it’s almost a dark and light thing, like Hird is playing Luke Skywalker to Buckley’s Vader; both are great Jedi’s, but choosing one or other comes down to a choice between the Empire or the People. Bear with me…

Hird, the forgotten kid from Canberra, slips through the cracks of the draft, all the way to pick no. 79, and humbly plays 2 years of reserves before debuting in the seniors. No word on whether an old hermit mentored him in the ways of the pig-skin. As analogised by Mrs. Watson, he plays with the flair a ballet dancer and with the look of a pop-star. Deceiving with his speed and strength, he can be unconventional, but he makes things happen. He is the gifted, oft-injured, flawed genius. He is the natural.

Contrastingly, Buckley has the look of a man who spends hours on the track, days in the weight room and seconds in the mirror. Everything is by the book, down the line, disciplined and almost mechanically perfect. From early on Buckley was used to playing the role of villain: Taken by the Brisbane Bears under the ‘zoning’ policy of the time, ‘Bucks’ burst onto the scene with a fantastic 1st year and then demanded to be traded to a bigger team, a bigger market, a bigger pay check and someone that wears black. If Buckley turns out to be Hirds father, well, that’ll be just plain weird.

So, what does this all have to do with the original question, namely, who is/was better, Hird or Buckley? There’s not much between them in terms of skill level, career accomplishments and personal attributes; Hird is 2cm taller, Buckley 2kg heavier. Both have won Brownlow Medals and both have taken their team to the big dance in September. I think a case could be made for either player being better than the other, which is why all this other stuff is important. It’s more how they go about it; do you want robotic precision or flawed humanity? How about a straight answer?

At his best, Hird was undoubtedly the better player. A versatile, goal kicking utility, Hird spent his best years at centre-half forward, roaming in to the middle and defence when required. His vision, ability to adapt to condition and circumstance, plus, the uncanny ability to come through with something special, when it was most needed, put him up there with the modern Greats of the game.

Buckley has always been the best player on his team, and he knows it. He has been a durable, reliable and a constant driving force on a series of mediocre Collingwood teams. His ability to hit targets on either side of his body makes his team-mates look 2nd rate, and he isn’t afraid to let them know. His focus and determination are unquestionable, yet this virtue may also be his weakness.

Buckley demands excellence from himself and expects it from everyone else; whereas Hird recognizes his teams limitations and plays to its strengths. This is the major difference. Buckley’s focus is so narrow and, well, focused, that anything peripheral suffers as a consequence. Like Darth Vader and the Deathstar itself, his sole purpose and intent exposes a very major weakness within. On the other hand, Hird always seems relaxed, like he knows eventually it will come to him, and so he should, he has the Force.

Ok, so maybe I’ve stretched a one line joke into a 900 word article that you didn’t really want to read, but let me remind you of two affecting images from the last couple of seasons; one, Buckley wiping his blood on to Cameron Ling, and two, James Hird hugging a fan in the front row after kicking the winning goal. Now ask yourself, am I for Empire, or the People?