Andrew Johns vs Darren Lockyer

[Johns Magic]

Andrew Johns on the other hand has bi-polar and seems to think that that makes it okay for him to take drugs. I cannot deny Joey's talent, but all he added to the game was his his (drug effected) self, which did come with some wonderful things, but unfairly wonderful things. I don't know what sort of a player he would have been without them or even whether he would have continued in the game. What I do know is his drug abuse and the Knights' and NRL's covering it up is far worse than any other kind of cheating which has occurred in the game in my lifetime. Another thing I know is that it is not possible for me to look back at Joey's career and forget the drugs because the reality is that he SHOULD have been reprimanded for taking them BEFORE his career took off.

You are f**king deluded...

 

[Noname36]

I cannot help but prefer Lockyer, I feel like Locky is a guy who everyone in the team with him benefits from playing alongside. The other thing about Locky is he always aims to be better and will always put in for his team. The reason Locky sounds the way he does is because he has been putting off having surgery on a broken bone in his throat til after his career is over so it wouldn't interfere with his ability to represent his teams and that is admirable.

Andrew Johns on the other hand has bi-polar and seems to think that that makes it okay for him to take drugs. I cannot deny Joey's talent, but all he added to the game was his his (drug effected) self, which did come with some wonderful things, but unfairly wonderful things. I don't know what sort of a player he would have been without them or even whether he would have continued in the game. What I do know is his drug abuse and the Knights' and NRL's covering it up is far worse than any other kind of cheating which has occurred in the game in my lifetime. Another thing I know is that it is not possible for me to look back at Joey's career and forget the drugs because the reality is that he SHOULD have been reprimanded for taking them BEFORE his career took off.

The thread is about who was the better player, not who has the least off field issues. Talent wise Johns had it all over Lockyer. That's nothing against Locky, Johns had it over everyone. Yes Lockyer was probably a better role model, but he's no poster child for good behavior either remember. Johns drug use wasnt performance enhancing either, if anything the type of drugs he was on would have hindered his performance dramatically. Like someone else said, imagine how good Johns would have been if he hadn't been all hopped up on pingers the night before a game.

This thread isn't a personality contest. It's about talent, and in that regard Johns >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Locky.

 

[Johns Magic]

Like someone else said, imagine how good Johns would have been if he hadn't been all hopped up on pingers the night before a game.

Night before the game?

I don't think so.

 

[Noname36]

Night before the game?

I don't think so.

I was more just an expression. None of us really know when or how often he was doing drugs, so I'd prefer not to get into a debate over it. My point though was that although there are still some idiots crying that Johns had an unfair advantage because he was on drugs, the ones he was on would have actually hindered his performance, not improved it.

 

[Johns Magic]

I was more just an expression. None of us really know when or how often he was doing drugs, so I'd prefer not to get into a debate over it. My point though was that although there are still some idiots crying that Johns had an unfair advantage because he was on drugs, the ones he was on would have actually hindered his performance, not improved it.

Yeah, they are definitely performance debilitating.

But you can't use expressions so freely like that when sheltered morons like Hallatia are around. Cos you know, taking pingas makes you superhuman and all...

 

[Coaster]

Would the drug speed be considered performance enhancing or debilitating?

 

[Johns Magic]

Do people here have no idea what recreational drugs do to people? Go out on a Saturday night and look around. Of course they're debilitating. Every single one of them.

And regardless, you don't feel their effects for weeks at a time. They last for a matter of hours. There is absolutely zero chance you would have seen their effects on the field.

If a player got pissed on Saturday night would you expect him to still show the effects of recreational drugs(alcohol) in his match next Friday night? Would getting pissed a week beforehand have enhanced his performance on the field?

 

[Big Pete]

My opinion is que sera sera, it happened, he broke the rules he should have faced a stint but in all fairness so should have Webcke.

Strings were pulled, it was shady but s**t happens.

 

[Cliffhanger]

I think his drug taking is moot in relation to this discussion, further why is everybody talking about it like he was an addict? He got drunk and would take drugs. Dig around and you'll find out he's not alone in that boat. For every indiscretion we hear about there's tonnes we don't. FFS have you read the tele? They're not exactly the best and brightest journalists on offer.

How did Joey not do anything for the people around him? You can't deny the effects his presence had on a team were amazing. Joey could do things on the field nobody else did, there were no flaws in his game and no weaknesses. He knew what to do to come away with the points, his passing game was excellent, his running game was great, he directed the play well, his team mates responded to him, his defence was solid and I don't think there is a word in English or any other language which can do his kicking game justice. Lockyer doesn't have it on John in any of this facets. He may be a faster runner. But who cares.

 

[Big Pete]

Lockyer really is/was just as inspirational as Johns.

Really.

 

[Cliffhanger]

I disagree, the way Joey lifted a team was different.. Lockyer spent most of his career with a better team around him too.

 

[Big Pete]

Check the stats. the Broncos relied on Lockyer more than Newcastle relied on Johns.

 

[Cliffhanger]

Lockyer didn't get injured as much as Johns and by the end of his career. They started getting better in the last 3 years of his career without him because he got injured that much.

The Broncos could still compete without Lockyer, Knights couldn't, even when Johns wasn't 100 per cent they, they looked like a totally different team.

The roosters record without Ricko was worse than their record without Fittler? Are you going to argue Ricko was more inspirational? The result isn't all that matters it's the whole effort and team morale or lack there of.

 

[RABK]

Lewis and Johns retirements left their states reeling.

I hope it is the same with Lockyer ;-)

We'll send him out a loser first.

 

[user_nat]

Johns was the better player in the halves.
Not really sure if there is a good way to compare a fullback with a halfback for Lockyers pre-5/8 days.

 

[ethos]

If you were comparing the two at their absolute peak, I'd take Johns marginally.

But looking at their careers as a whole, Lockyer's longevity at the highest levels and ability to play very successfully and dominate selection in two positions shouldn't be discounted.

So, I have to say Lockyer over Johns.

 

[Big Pete]

They started getting better in the last 3 years of his career without him because he got injured that much.

This stat. was first noted as far back in 2003 and has just grown in stature since then.

The Broncos could still compete without Lockyer, Knights couldn't, even when Johns wasn't 100 per cent they, they looked like a totally different team.

So did the Broncos without Lockyer.

The roosters record without Ricko was worse than their record without Fittler? Are you going to argue Ricko was more inspirational? The result isn't all that matters it's the whole effort and team morale or lack there of.

Sounds like Ricko is more the exception than the rule.

That last point can just as easily be applied to Lockyer.

 

[Mr Saab]

The Broncos could still compete without Lockyer, Knights couldn't, even when Johns wasn't 100 per cent they, they looked like a totally different team.

Really? Take a look at the Broncos at the end of 2010. They looked like a rabble when he missed the final few games and they missed the finals

 

[Cliffhanger]

Really? Take a look at the Broncos at the end of 2010. They looked like a rabble when he missed the final few games and they missed the finals

They looked shaky after Origin and hit a slump, it wasn't just the absence of Lockyer. Not saying he doesn't lift his team, of course he does, he has the respect of his players, just saying he doesn't have the presence of Johns.

 

[Big Pete]

In what world is beating the premiers, prelim finalists and pushing the runners up to the brink shaky?