BRR - We agree about Hunter being by FAR a better player than Merrick. I had to respond to Cider, but could have responded to others - 'Cider - we're talking CB's here and although Merrick was good in the 2nd Division he played the large majority in the 1st Division at LB. AD moved quickly in our first season after promotion because he knew Merrick wasn't good enough at LH and bought Hunter. Your description of Hunter was spot on but I would add I didn't realise until he played for us how good he was in the air. When he played for Leeds I thought he just 'cleaned up' after Jack Charlton, how wrong was I - Norman Hunter never had any weakness at all' You wrote - 'If we hadn't got Hunter in, then City would have missed out on 3 years at the top because Merrick was painfully not up to the job of managing the best strikers in the country, whereas Hunter had been doing it for years and continued to here (even at 34). Why do you think Dicks actually bought Hunter and farmed Merrick out to left back ?' - SPOT ON. Your comment I agree the most - 'It is unbelievable voting !' - You're right, it's an absolute joke. BRR - You can't blame the Youngens, but there sure are a few Olduns who are a sandwich short of a picnic ! ps - A few 'legends' came on the pitch a few weeks back including Royle, Hunter and Merrick. Royle and Hunter looked a foot taller than Merrick and real men. Merrick looked what he was - a boy. At best a LB but never ever a 1st Division Left Half.
I agree, but looks like we both missed the vote otherwise Hunter would have been in - I think there was only 1 vote in it
2 votes would of but hunter over collier Merrick ran away with it though, had 8 votes to colliers 6 and hunters 4
Blimey Red, don't you ever go on when you get outvoted, no one doubted Hunters Quality, but this oldun went for Merrick because of the number of games he played for City prior to getting promoted, and the number he played after in Div 1 albiet at left back. And to say Merrick Looked like a boy compared to the other two, he was obviously smaller, but had a big heart, and when he tackled, tackled like a man, shame you weren't good enough to be on the end of a few.
Thanks ADthe great. Oldun I may be (69) but I'm still not showing any sign of senility. Perhaps my lifelong stupidity in supporting BCFC will allow me to die without losing the marbles or the memories. To everyone, I know that the title of this thread is "favourite" city players per position. However, I decided long ago that for a player to qualify as a City great, they should have played a significant part of their career at Bristol City. Thus for me, the second centre half position alongside my all time dominant centre half, Jack Connor, was a toss up between Merrick and the best captain I've seen at Ashton Gate in my lifetime, Jack White from the 1955 Third division Champions. By the way, the last championship we have won! Thus while I acknowledge that Möller, Hunter, Cole, Jacki and a few others may qualify as the best players in their position, it, in my humble opinion, does not qualify them as All Time Bristol City Greats.
Why should someone being taller, make them more a man.....just shows what you have in that prejudice brain of yours mate!!!
********************UPDATE********************* Mickey Bell 8 Martin Scott 4 Darren Barnard 3 Jim Brennan 1 Mike Thresher 1 Bryan Drysdale 1 ***************** Have up Until 3:00 pm today to cast your votes **************************
I had it the same as you for those 3 but went with Scott but was as you say on a very fine bit between them
Bells defending let him down, which is probably why he did not play at a far higher level. Scott and Brennan were better defenders. Brennan was a more complete footballer. Scott in particular was hard to beat and highly dependable, but Barnard had that extra class going forward coupled with competency when defending. Barnard.
