Azkatro said:
Allan Langer, was halfback with 4 premiership-winning Brisbane Broncos sides. Played 37 games for Queensland (including Tri-Series), winning 19 of those as halfback (with 1 draw). Represented Australia in I think 22 Tests.
Andrew Johns, halfback with 2 premiership-winning Newcastle sides. Played 23 games for NSW, winning 7 as halfback (with 1 draw). Represented Australia in 18 Tests.
Langer also played with the severe handicap of being shorter and weighing less, so consequently it is fair to add 50% to his achievements to even up the scores.
I believe Allan Langer has achieved much, much more as a halfback than Johns has or will, therefore making him the better player by default.
The inference that Qld won because Langer was at half is faulty - Lewis was at 5/8 for a number of those wins.
The inference that Langer is a better player because the Broncos won more premierships than Newcastle and he played more origins and tests is also wrong (verging on dumb).
The inference that you should add 50% to anything he achieved because he was little, is absurd... maybe we could subtract 50% as well beacuse he played for the best club of the 90's??
Langer achieved more yes - he played at a stronger club, and suffered fewer injuries... Was Vautine a superior player to Sironen because he played more origins and won more premierships??
Qld's win rate in SOO dropped when Lewis retired, and one could argue that Stuart had the better of Langer at that level.
Brisbane won a premiership immediately after Langer's retirement, Newcastle can barely win a game without Johns...
My vote, Langer achieved more (laregly due to circumstance), but Johns was the better player...