Hall of Fame and Immortals

[Tommy Smith]

On a side note I'm surprised that Isaah Yeo & Waqa Blake were overlooked.

 

[King hit]

I'm surprised there is no mention of Mick Cronin. He was Meninga before Meninga and an absolute champion on and off the field. When he won the Rothmans Medal he said "Rugby League owes me nothing. I owe Rugby League everything" Unlike like Mal "Rugby League has done nothing for me" Meninga

An aunt of mine hates Mal with a passion for that comment.

 

[Captain Apollo]

The following article was published on the NRL's website yesterday -

Modern players to dominate next Immortals vote
Author:Brad Walter, Senior Reporter
Timestamp: Thu 2 Aug 2018, 06:58 PM

Up to eight new names are set to join Darren Lockyer and Brian Bevan on the next Immortals short list in 2022 following revelations that Norm Provan and Mal Meninga would have been ineligible to be considered again if they hadn’t been chosen for induction on Wednesday night.

With the NRL taking over the prestigious award from Rugby League Week, it was initially decided that the new three-strikes policy for players to be considered, should not be retrospective. But the 10 judges who selected Provan and Meninga did so with the understanding that it was their last chance for inclusion.

A review of the selection policies for the Hall of Fame and Immortals is expected to formally declare any player considered three times is no longer eligible, including those who the former RLW editors and previous judging panels in 1981, 1999, 2003 and 2012 had discussed.

As a result, Ron Coote, Ken Irvine and Duncan Hall are no longer likely to be in contention for Immortal status, while Provan and Meninga would not have been eligible again had they missed out this time.

Provan had previously been considered four times, while Meninga had been shortlisted before in 2003 and 2012.

It was also the view of the judges that the pre-World War II era be ruled off after the decision to induct Dave Brown, Frank Burge and Dally Messenger as Immortals, along with Provan and Meninga.

Therefore, the pool of players currently eligible for Immortal status has been reduced to 55 as the criteria requires them to have been retired for five years and be inducted as members of the Hall of Fame before they can be shortlisted.

Lockyer and Bevan were both under consideration for the first time so they will each have two more chances to become Immortals in 2022 and 2026, by which time Cameron Smith, Johnathan Thurston and Billy Slater are expected to be in contention.

The decision means the likes of Peter Sterling, Allan Langer, Glenn Lazarus and Brad Fittler are likely to be considered for the shortlist in 2022, which may be reduced to six or seven names.

It was the selection of Bevan on the short list by a screening committee which caused the re-think about making the three-strikes policy retrospective, as the winger was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2008 but would be ineligible under the new NRL criteria because he played the majority of his career in England.

Harry Bath, who was a member of the initial selection committee in 1981, which chose Clive Churchill, John Raper, Reg Gasnier and Bob Fulton as the first four Immortals, would also not qualify for the Hall of Fame under the new eligibility rules.

"If we were to adopt the criteria that allowed for Brian Bevan and Harry Bath to be qualified in 2007, given that they played the majority of their careers in England, then we would adopt also those processes of the past as well to ensure there was consistency," NRL international strategy and awards senior manager Frank Puletua said.

"Therefore, Mal and Norm and those guys who were already discussed and deliberated over in previous votes, they would count as previous strikes, so this would mean that this would be the final one for them.

"There has been a really strong view, especially from those who were on those selection panels in the past, that they had assessed those players on their merits and at the time they found there were other players who had stronger cases to be inducted as an Immortal.

"It really was just whether the game would acknowledge those votes had taken place and whether we would take them into account. But if we were to maintain a level of consistency with what was inherited from previous processes and what wouldn’t be then we would have to do so."

Puletua, who has spent two years revamping the NRL awards structure, including the implementation of clear eligibility rules which enables all players – and not only Australians - to aspire to Immortal status, was involved in the decision to induct five players on Wednesday night.

The idea to grant Immortal status to the three pre-war players - Brown Burge and Messenger – came from Phil Gould, who believed it was impossible to compare Brown to Meninga or Messenger to Lockyer as they had played 100 years apart.

He won support from the other nine judges, who comprised of fellow coaching great Wayne Bennett, Immortals Bob Fulton, Wally Lewis and Andrew Johns, former RLW editors Ian Heads and Norm Tasker, Nine commentator Ray Warren, Fox Sports head of sport Steve Crawley and NRL CEO Todd Greenberg.

"Everyone began to talk about the pre-war challenges and difficulties about trying to juxtapose those players up against the modern players," Puletua said.

"It was Phil Gould and Rabs [Warren] who raised the really important point of how those players from pre-war and war-time would be more and more disadvantaged as the years go on.

"The discussion started to move from there then what happened, which is something that will stick in my mind forever, is that Wayne consolidated everyone's views and literally turned to Todd to say the group now feels strongly to put forward a recommendation.

"What they were seeking was endorsement from the game and a number of people from the NRL [including Puletua, Brian Canavan and Jason King] left the room for a lengthy time to weigh up whether there were any other implications from doing so.

"My view was that there was so much value in it and coming from a group as pre-eminent as the one who met on Tuesday, who would question it," Puletua said.

 

[blaza88z]

These threads always deliver, I don't take anything seriously in here because it's usually fuelled by "that bloke from my club" style logic, entertaining none the less

 

[Captain Apollo]

The following article was published yesterday afternoon on the NRL's website -

NRL may elect to induct five Immortals again
Author:Alicia Newton
Timestamp: Thu 2 Aug 2018, 03:48 PM

Former Rugby League Week editor Ian Heads could not guarantee the decision to induct five new Immortals was a one-off after the NRL's judging panel's surprise announcement on Wednesday night.

The response from the wider rugby league public over the decision to induct three pre-war players – Dally Messenger, Frank Burge and Dave Brown – along with post-war players Norm Provan and Mal Meninga, has been overwhelmingly positive.

With voting under the NRL's control for the first time since the magazine closed, the next Immortals inducted will be in 2022.

"It will revert back to a more formal stage probably," Heads, who was part of the judging panel, said.

"But it is a bit of a moving beast, you don't know. In four years' time it's going to be very interesting again. We're going to have to sit down and go through the whole process. You can't really pick what's going to happen."

With modern-day players Cameron Smith and Johnathan Thurston, who have been dubbed future Immortals by many experts, expected to retire over the next few seasons, Heads said there was no better time to include the pre-war pioneers before it was too late.

Smith and Thurston will be eligible for immortality status five years after their retirements with widespread pressure for immediate inclusion a key factor for the judging panel.

"It was always going to get harder and harder as the years went ahead," Heads said.

"It's just the changing nature of things. It wasn't going to change the fundamentals of things. People will disagree and there will be different opinions that this guy or that guy should have been there.

"There was always a thought that Dally would be there. He might be on his own in future years it was going to be harder and harder to get early day players in because of the strength and talent we have now. It developed and was a really interesting room to be in."

The judging panel met at the Sydney Cricket Ground on Tuesday prior to the announcement and included key rugby league figures Wally Lewis, Bob Fulton, Andrew Johns, Wayne Bennett, Phil Gould, Ray Warren, Steve Crawley and Norm Tasker.

"I think we were all a bit shocked ourselves during the meeting when it was almost an organic thing that happened," Heads said.

"There was a lot of harmony amongst the judges and in the end it came down to a unanimous decision we would go that way.

"The idea has been going around a while. Norm Tasker, who followed me in as editor of RLW, he mentioned he raised the subject at one stage of putting a fence around the pre-war players at some stage. And I thought there was a case for doing that.

"I think that was the motivation. There was some good support, Wayne Bennett and Phil Gould. It grew within the room that was the way to go.

"There were other great early day players who are not there. Having these three great players is a bit of nod to history."

Channel Nine commentator and league expert Phil Gould explained the historic process in Six Tackles with Gus podcast on Thursday.

Gould said conversations with former editors Heads and Tasker painted a picture that neither had seen the pre-war pioneers of the game ever play and felt they couldn't include them under the magazine's concept.

"That was certainly one of the motivations, to give it the ultimate credibility it had to reflect our full history," Gould said.

"The more we talked about it and considered what the Immortal prestige represents, it was only right we went back to the beginning of time and found those that were dominant in their respective eras.

"It came through that we recommended all three be in, then go through to choose two from seven. The pre-war [players] were standalone and sold themselves."

On a day of discussions that lasted five hours, Gould added it was a scramble behind the scenes to rearrange the broadcast's order of ceremonies and keep the announcement of an additional three Immortals confidential.

"It was wonderful, we were confident it would get that sort of reaction," Gould said.

"We were very appreciative of the NRL probably changing what they had planned at the last moment because they were only anticipating the Hall of Fame inductees and the two Immortals to come from the 10 that had been nominated.

"The discussions on the Tuesday afternoon with wonderful rugby league people in a great atmosphere and spirit came to the conclusion."

 

[Lambretta]

Edited According to the information below the NRL will be adding up to two players to the Immortals list every four years

HALL OF FAME INDUCTION PARAMETERS – PLAYER

• Minimum two (2) inductions – Maximum four (4) inductions per annual cycle (see Cycle) In the event players, outside of the top four tally the same number of votes as those within the top four – a countback mechanism will be executed to determine who received the higher number of five (5) point votes, four (4) point votes, three (3) point votes, etc. (see Table.3)

INDUCTION PARAMETERS – IMMORTALS
Minimum of one (1) induction – Maximum two (2) inductions per four (4) year cycle


The NRL rules state Max 2 players - Minimum of 1 every four years

Is the ratio correct when you consider that between 8 and 16 players can be elevated to the hall of fame in the same time-frame

We could get a situation where 8 players are added to the hall of fame and 2 are elevated to Immortal status

Does that seem right to you or should Immortal Status be a little more exclusive?

Personally I would prefer to see 2 or 3 players maximum elevated to Immortal status for any decade (by decade, I mean the decade we mainly associate them with - for example Beetson started in the 60s and finished in the 80s but he's a 70s player to most people's minds)

Once the places are full, that's it - no more

If that logic is followed the following players and eras are represented

Pre War - As now officially closed - Messenger, Brown, Burge

50's - Churchill, Provan
60's - Raper, Gasnier, Langlands
70's - Fulton, Beetson
80's - Lewis, Maninga
90's - Johns
00's -

That means we have 8 spaces left for the previous decades (absolute tops)

Should we severely limit immortal status or should be we increasing the numbers of immortals at a rate of 1 every second year

Thoughts?

 

[Front-Rower]

and it’s obvious he doesn’t feel that way now.

Of course. He got gifted a tonne of cash, and the reigns of a Queensland and Australian side that were unbeatable.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Paul Kent was banging on about the NRL adding two players to the Immortals list every four years

HALL OF FAME INDUCTION PARAMETERS – PLAYER

• Minimum two (2) inductions – Maximum four (4) inductions per annual cycle (see Cycle) In the event players, outside of the top four tally the same number of votes as those within the top four – a countback mechanism will be executed to determine who received the higher number of five (5) point votes, four (4) point votes, three (3) point votes, etc. (see Table.3)

INDUCTION PARAMETERS – IMMORTALS
Minimum of one (1) induction – Maximum two (2) inductions per four (4) year cycle


The NRL rules state Max 2 players - Minimum of 1 every four years

Is the ratio correct when you consider that between 8 and 16 players can be elevated to the hall of fame in the same time-frame

We could get a situation where 8 players are added to the hall of fame and 2 are elevated to Immortal status

Does that seem right to you or should Immortal Status be a little more exclusive?

Personally I would prefer to see 2 or 3 players maximum elevated to Immortal status for any decade (by decade, I mean the decade we mainly associate them with - for example Beetson started in the 60s and finished in the 80s but he's a 70s player to most people's minds)

Once the places are full, that's it - no more

If that logic is followed the following players and eras are represented

Pre War - As now officially closed - Messenger, Brown, Burge

50's - Churchill, Provan
60's - Raper, Gasnier, Langlands
70's - Fulton, Beetson
80's - Lewis, Maninga
90's - Johns
00's -

That means we have 8 spaces left for the previous decades (absolute tops)

Should we severely limit immortal status or should be we increasing the numbers of immortals at a rate of 1 every second year

Thoughts?

Sorry but you lost me after "Paul Kent". I could not care less what he thinks on anything.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

An aunt of mine hates Mal with a passion for that comment.

My second cousin's step son's dog loves him.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

TBH if Mal's an immortal, then Laurie Daley deserves to be too. Mal played his best footy at the Raiders from 89-91, then Laurie hit his straps and was the Raiders best player from 92-94 (rest of Mal's career). They were about as good as each other in 91. Mal probably had better longevity, but Daley is the Raiders best ever player.

 

[Lambretta]

Sorry but you lost me after "Paul Kent". I could not care less what he thinks on anything.

Mate, you needed to read beyond that - as that was merely an opening line
The rest was of my thunkering

I have edited so you can care

 

[Lambretta]

That Meninga comment still hits a raw nerve for so many, including me. I’m sure if he could turn back time he would erase it from living memory as it was said at an emotional stage of the games’ evolution and it’s obvious he doesn’t feel that way now.

Still, it would have been courageous and commendable if he acknowledged it during his Immortals speech.

He was a lot younger back then
Who hasn't said things they've regretted?

You only have to read the Bulldogs v Broncos thread from last night to find a sock full of muppets saying stupid things they no doubt regretted soon after

I'll forgive him his trespasses.............. not so sure I can forgive his Queenslanderness, but maybe one day I'll be man enough to. I live in hope

 

[no name]

He was a lot younger back then
Who hasn't said things they've regretted?

You only have to read the Bulldogs v Broncos thread from last night to find a sock full of muppets saying stupid things they no doubt regretted soon after

I'll forgive him his trespasses.............. not so sure I can forgive his Queenslanderness, but maybe one day I'll be man enough to. I live in hope

I’m sure he does regret it, but the fact that main stream media tip toes around it will ensure it lingers forever.
He should man up and address the issue. This will give everyone an idea of what his real feelings are and give everyone a chance to move on.
As it stands, he sounds like a hypocrite.

 

[kdalymc]

Where is this 95 quote from Meninga ?

 

[billyjoebob]

Edited According to the information below the NRL will be adding up to two players to the Immortals list every four years

HALL OF FAME INDUCTION PARAMETERS – PLAYER

• Minimum two (2) inductions – Maximum four (4) inductions per annual cycle (see Cycle) In the event players, outside of the top four tally the same number of votes as those within the top four – a countback mechanism will be executed to determine who received the higher number of five (5) point votes, four (4) point votes, three (3) point votes, etc. (see Table.3)

INDUCTION PARAMETERS – IMMORTALS
Minimum of one (1) induction – Maximum two (2) inductions per four (4) year cycle


The NRL rules state Max 2 players - Minimum of 1 every four years

Is the ratio correct when you consider that between 8 and 16 players can be elevated to the hall of fame in the same time-frame

We could get a situation where 8 players are added to the hall of fame and 2 are elevated to Immortal status

Does that seem right to you or should Immortal Status be a little more exclusive?

Personally I would prefer to see 2 or 3 players maximum elevated to Immortal status for any decade (by decade, I mean the decade we mainly associate them with - for example Beetson started in the 60s and finished in the 80s but he's a 70s player to most people's minds)

Once the places are full, that's it - no more

If that logic is followed the following players and eras are represented

Pre War - As now officially closed - Messenger, Brown, Burge

50's - Churchill, Provan
60's - Raper, Gasnier, Langlands
70's - Fulton, Beetson
80's - Lewis, Maninga
90's - Johns
00's -

That means we have 8 spaces left for the previous decades (absolute tops)

Should we severely limit immortal status or should be we increasing the numbers of immortals at a rate of 1 every second year

Thoughts?

Im just a bit confused with the choices its a bit hard to pick a player that never actually played any test matches for australia dave brown but congratulations to them all i think meninga should of been there before johns and im still confused how johns got there it was a pitty vote for him at the time not saying hes not a great player but statistics wise hes number 5
or 6 place in the halfbacks alone

 

[Willie Ray]

Canberra wouldn't have won their premierships without Meninga and Stuart - Stuart controlled games and Meninga's mere presence on the field inspired his team mates and put fear into the opposition. Brad Clyde (along with Chicka Ferguson) is my favourite all time raiders player. Daley was a champion at all levels. I think if they weren't in those Canberra sides we would still have won, not so Stuart and Meninga.What sways Mal to be an immortal over Stuart then, imo is that he was top drawer for the whole of his career, 4 kangaroo tours is testament to that, whilst Ricky seemed to fade post that horrific ankle injury which to his credit could have been career ending.

Langer at his best was awesome, but probably played on to long.

Sterling and Kenny should be immortals. That parramatta side of the 80s is severely under represented when hall of fame and immortal discussions are made.

This times by a thousand.

 

[Lebbo73]

Wading through the shitposts and trolls(75% of which are mine), what do people think about Clyde, Daley, Stuart, Kenny,Sterling and Langer with respect to Immortal status?

Besides those mentioned already, for mine, that's probably the best group of players I've seen in my generation.

Hall of Famers only

Edit: Sterling should be an Immortal and maybe Stuart should be as well. Mick Cronin and Ray Price must be a great chance to be Immortals in the future as well.

 

[Saintsified]

Brett Mullins is the best ever fullback.

 

[Perth Tiger]

Brett Mullins is the best ever fullback.

Tim Brasher had him covered easy, shame he played in some of the worst teams of all time.

 

[ed-grimley]

Ken Irvine should get serious consideration.