Lockyer > Johns: no contest

[Mr. Fahrenheit]

noone is arguing that Joey isn't up there with him, its just a debate for many as to who should be considered 'better'. FTR I think Thurston will sh*t it in over both of them once his career is over... Its hard to compare the onfield skills of them both given the 4 positions they've both covered at rep level. Lockyer was the best fb, then the best 5/8, he mastered the skills required by both positions. He has a better long kicking game than Johns, but a inferior short kicking game. Theyre passing whilst different, i would rate the same as with their ability to visualise the game and make the right play at the right time. Defensively Johns is stronger physically as has been mentioned, Lockyer made up for this with amazing positioning to counter any size advantage. You add captaincy + leadership where Lockyer has a massive edge, then its easy to see why many are saying they'd prefer Locky on-field as well as off.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

Johns isn't even in the top 3 NSW origin players of all time.

 

[hellteam]

Johns better at club football.

Lockyer better at Origin football.

Lockyer better at International football.

They're very close - but I'd have to just, JUST give it to Lockyer. I can certainly see the side of those who think Johns is better though.

Even though Johns was probably better on his day, its not all about that. People say that Lockyer's leadership is better, and it probably is - that should definitely come in to these arguments, it's not all about skill. Lockyer has been amazingly consistent, played about a million games in all forms of league, been the best in the world in two positions and is still looking good for another year of Origin and hopefully another premiership

Plus somehow Lockyer's defence has actually got better in the last few years, about 4-5 years ago 50 percent of the Broncos tries were conceded through him I reckon but he's been a lot better these last two years.

 

[Noa]

noone is arguing that Joey isn't up there with him, its just a debate for many as to who should be considered 'better'. FTR I think Thurston will sh*t it in over both of them once his career is over... Its hard to compare the onfield skills of them both given the 4 positions they've both covered at rep level. Lockyer was the best fb, then the best 5/8, he mastered the skills required by both positions. He has a better long kicking game than Johns, but a inferior short kicking game. Theyre passing whilst different, i would rate the same as with their ability to visualise the game and make the right play at the right time. Defensively Johns is stronger physically as has been mentioned, Lockyer made up for this with amazing positioning to counter any size advantage. You add captaincy + leadership where Lockyer has a massive edge, then its easy to see why many are saying they'd prefer Locky on-field as well as off.

He has to win something first to even get a mention, and Origin doesnt count.

 

[Ghoulies]

Lockyer a better person? Not from the many stories ive heard of the man when he's on the piss.

:lol: Keep listening to your stories, big fella. Lockyer is no saint, but I'll be a very shocked man the day he outdoes the damage Johns has done to his image over the past 2 years.

 

[Parra Guru]

Johns by a nose. I think of the player I'd rather have in my team (playing ability only) and it would have to be Joey.

 

[hugzy]

wait r u talking about whos the better fisherman? or whos better in bed?

cuz if ur tlaking about anything to do with rugby league then joey is simply the best

wait wait dont move *turkey slaps u* now get lost :0)

 

[Red Bear]

Lockyer had some pretty sh*tty teams from 01-05 and still got them to the finals every year.

He still had a forward pack which featured Petero and Webke, two of the best 3 props of the last 10 years, as well as Tallis (although his influence waned the last couple of seasons). Still at times had Hodges there etc.

The newcastle sides of 04-07 were mostly tits, apart from Johns at times Buderus and Simpsons, even Kidley didnt come into his own till 08 or so.

 

[Big Pete]

even Kidley didnt come into his own till 08 or so.

Hodges didn't come into his own until 2006 yet you wanted to include him.

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Johns is 10 lengths better then Lockyer you dopes,it is not even a contest.

 

[Dazzat]

Johns by a nose. I think of the player I'd rather have in my team (playing ability only) and it would have to be Joey.

Most of you can't get it through your head ... I'm not talking about ability. How can you compare the ability of a front-rower and a halfback?

What I'm talking about is TOTAL ACCUMULATED INFLUENCE. Over the course of their careers, Lockyer's influence at Origin level far, far, far, far, far exceeds that of Johns.

More games, more wins as captain ... it's pretty clear, and there is not contest.

And if it were to choose between a player of SKILL and a player of INFLUENCE I'd go for the later every time. The world's most skilful player can have no positive influence. But a player of limited skill can have huge influence.

Lockyer has skill, probably not as much as Johns, but his influence in Origin far exceeds that of anyone except Wally Lewis.

 

[mikail-eagle]

The only way to solve this debate is through their head to head stats.

I know Joey retired a couple of seasons ago but they still played against each other at both club and origin level zillions of times.

Someone find the stats from somewhere and lets end this debate.

 

[Dazzat]

The only way to solve this debate is through their head to head stats.

I know Joey retired a couple of seasons ago but they still played against each other at both club and origin level zillions of times.

Someone find the stats from somewhere and lets end this debate.

Captaining his state to four series Origin wins ... how does Joey compare on that front?

 

[Tommy Smith]

Most of you can't get it through your head ... I'm not talking about ability. How can you compare the ability of a front-rower and a halfback?

What I'm talking about is TOTAL ACCUMULATED INFLUENCE. Over the course of their careers, Lockyer's influence at Origin level far, far, far, far, far exceeds that of Johns.

More games, more wins as captain ... it's pretty clear, and there is not contest.

And if it were to choose between a player of SKILL and a player of INFLUENCE I'd go for the later every time. The world's most skilful player can have no positive influence. But a player of limited skill can have huge influence.

Lockyer has skill, probably not as much as Johns, but his influence in Origin far exceeds that of anyone except Wally Lewis.

Oh ok ok. Based on total accumuated influence then Lockyer is better than Johns.

Just as based on total accumulated influence Ricky Ponting and Steve Waugh are better than Don Bradman....

 

[Someone]

Johns was the best player to ever pull boots, however Lockyer is one of most passionate players ive seen. Id rather Lockyer in my team.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Johns was the best player to ever pull boots, however Lockyer is one of most passionate players ive seen. Id rather Lockyer in my team.

So you'd rather have the bloke who isn't as good in your team - by your own words?

Umm, ok.

Id also rather have Trevor Gillmeister in my team over Brad Clyde. He wasn't as good but he was just so passionate!

Sorry for the mocking tone, but i cant help but find these never ending "so and so's the best" heat of the moment threads very annoying.

Andrew Johns played Rugby League on a different planet to anyone ive ever seen (don't worry Qlders, i never saw Wally!) so i just find this comparison quite funny - especially when people are using "accumulated influence", "passion" and "off-field behaviour" as reasons for why they'd rather have him in their team.

Whereas id rather just have the better player who is more likely to win me games. Funny that...

 

[Someone]

So you'd rather have the bloke who isn't as good in your team - by your own words?

Umm, ok.

Id also rather have Trevor Gillmeister in my team over Brad Clyde. He wasn't as good but he was just so passionate!

Sorry for the mocking tone, but i cant help but find these never ending "so and so's the best" heat of the moment threads very annoying.

Andrew Johns played Rugby League on a different planet to anyone ive ever seen (don't worry Qlders, i never saw Wally!) so i just find this comparison quite funny - especially when people are using "accumulated influence", "passion" and "off-field behaviour" as reasons for why they'd rather have him in their team.

Whereas id rather just have the better player who is more likely to win me games. Funny that...

You are a grade A idoit.

Johns was good, but Lockyer can get the best out of his side. He has a great influence and a strong passion, which gets the best out of his players.

So in my opinion id rather Lockyer, who has been apart of a Broncos side that has never missed the finals. Lockyer has also had less injuries compared to Johns.

And dont get my started on off-field comparsion.

So why dont you lay off me f**kwit, i have an opinion and il share it.

 

[Tommy Smith]

You are a grade A idoit.

Johns was good, but Lockyer can get the best out of his side. He has a great influence and a strong passion, which gets the best out of his players.

So in my opinion id rather Lockyer, who has been apart of a Broncos side that has never missed the finals. Lockyer has also had less injuries compared to Johns.

And dont get my started on off-field comparsion.

So why dont you lay off me f**kwit, i have an opinion and il share it.

By all means share your opinion. That's what im doing.

Just on this part, "Johns was good, but Lockyer can get the best out of his side." Care to elaborate?

Because to me here are two of the greatest examples of getting the best out of your side:

1) Making Sean Rudder a Premiership winner and actually making him look like a quality 5/8 in the process. Only a genius could ever have done that.

2) Was it 2004 when with Joey injured the Knights started the season 0-11? And looking like one of the worst sides of all-time in the process. And when he comes back in they look like a quality side and win something like 10 of their last 13 games. Now THATS making your side look good like its never been done before by a single player in history.

Basically every single player in that Knights side when Joey was around - bar Bedsy, Kennedy and Steve SImpson - looked like a much better player with Johns in the team.

So how you can imply that he didn't always get the best out of his teammates with that comment im not quite sure...

 

[Big Pete]

2) Was it 2004 when with Joey injured the Knights started the season 0-11? And looking like one of the worst sides of all-time in the process. And when he comes back in they look like a quality side and win something like 10 of their last 13 games. Now THATS making your side look good like its never been done before by a single player in history.

2005, Johns started the season and the Knights were getting flogged. Buderus came back on deck and the Knights were just about in every contest, then Johns came in and was the difference.

With that said, Johns certainly influenced his players at times.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

x 2

Lockyer is a better leader, better role model, better ambassador for the games and has achieved more. Skill wise, he has nothing on Johns

X3.

Playing wise, its a competition but Joey was a better player by a decent margin.

Role model wise and all the good stuff its not even a contest Lockyer hands down.