What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Lockyer > Johns: no contest

Jason Maher

Immortal
Messages
35,981
Haven't read the thread, but I agree with the fundamental point raised by the OP, namely that Lockyer > Johns. Not by as great a margin as the OP figures, I'm sure, but Lockyer is definitely the #1 player of the last 20 years as far as I'm concerned.
 

cornerposter

Juniors
Messages
978
Yeah by who? Some big fat chicken eating African American chick from Kentucky?
You'd be a Johns fan, right? Musta been hard not to say fat black s**t...

I'll see your Sean Rudder and raise you Shane Perry.



I'll make this plain and simple, when on his drugs.. ooops i meant game, Johns there are very few better. Johns peak skillwise was higher, but could only manage a couple of peaks in his career. Lockyers career though, has consisted of SUSTAINED EXCELLENCE at a very high level. Maybe not peaking as high as Johns, but sustained in more than flashes here and there.

Want someone to stake your life on? D. Lockyer. Want someone to win an unwinnable game once every 5 years? A. Johns.
x 100 FTW
 

8Ball

First Grade
Messages
5,132
To be honest, this thread shows how fickle some of us fans are. Lockyer, strings together a few good games, and this is all up in the air again. Lockyer has a few sh*t ones, and suddenly he's not fit to lace Johns' boots.
 

perverse

Referee
Messages
26,274
To be honest, this thread shows how fickle some of us fans are. Lockyer, strings together a few good games, and this is all up in the air again. Lockyer has a few sh*t ones, and suddenly he's not fit to lace Johns' boots.
indeed.

the truth of it is that this debate will rage on long after they both retire. no-one is ever going to see it the other way. i'm not sure why i actually bothered jumping in this time... i spent waaaay too much time debating this 5 years ago already...
 

Johns Magic

Referee
Messages
21,654
Lockyer's longevity has given him a career in which he's been able to achieve far more than Johns. In 20 years when people look back at Origin, Lockyer will be remembered as having a far more illustrious Origin career, and he will be remembered as the figurehead of the greatest Origin side in history.

Johns's Origin career was nowhere near as fluent. He didn't oversee a dynasty like Lockyer did, and despite only losing one Origin series he ever played in(outside the 95 series barring Super League players), he won't be seen as as successful in the Origin arena over his career.

So yes you're right Dazzat, Lockyer > Johns no contest in terms of influential and successful Origin careers.

However, as footballers, it is a different matter, on which you have your opinion and I have mine. Personally I don't care about this issue anywhere near as much as you do, both are great players and that's all that matters to me. Every time Lockyer has a great game you clearly can't wait to come on the forums and make posts as if the two are in direct competition or something, seems like you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder.

Then after waxing lyrical about Lockyer and bagging Johns, you will inevitably make some lame comment like "cue the Johns worshippers", despite you clearly being the obsessive one on the issue.

I remember hearing similar things before 2005 when every Queenslander was puffing his chest out saying Lockyer > Johns and what a myth Johns was, how awesome Lockyer was etc. It was eerily quiet in here after that.

All this talk about Lockyer being able to drive a team to success far better than Johns did is a bit rich considering Johns went out with a series win and a 22 point drubbing of Queensland at Suncorp. In a team that had lost Game 1 without him. All against a Lockyer captained Queensland side. Lockyer is great, but you would be lying if you said Johns wasn't great at steering teams to victory as well.

Lockyer has had the more successful Origin career for sure. But that doesn't mean Lockyer had it over Johns when they came up against each other in Origin. Lockyer only ever won one Origin series against Johns, way back in 1998. In fact, Lockyer's only Origin series victory(and NSW's only series loss) from 1998-2005 came when Johns was out injured. And Lockyer's Origin dominance has coincided with Johns retiring.

So in summary, I don't really care. Of course I have an opinion on the matter, but it's not something that eats away at me so much I'd start a thread about it. Johns stopped being a factor in Origin 5 years ago for everyone bar you. But if you're going to come out with chest-beating threads like this that pay no attention to the facts, people have a right to provide them for you and to present the other side of the story.

Unfortunately unlike last time all these Lockyer > Johns threads were started, Johns won't be back to speak for himself, so you can keep believing what you want to believe undisturbed. Personally my opinion is that they are both outstanding Origin players.
 
Last edited:

Johns Magic

Referee
Messages
21,654
the thing that irks me the most about people bringing up Buderus and Johns and their relative skills to each other is that one day it's Buderus made Johns look good... a few days later it's Johns made Buderus look good... all depending on who you ask.

Generally that depends on whether you're talking to a Broncos fan or a Tigers fan.
 

Joker's Wild

Coach
Messages
17,894
Johns played in two positions also at rep level, he played hooker cause he wasn't even good enough to be starting halfback.

Your saying the NSW selectors were right to pick him at hooker? Like they arnt complete morons who regularly pick players out of position at the detrement of the team?

More to the point, are you actually suggesting that Kimmorly or Toovey were better halfbacks than Joey? Seriously?

Lay off the smack bro
 

Red Bear

Referee
Messages
20,882
Lockyer does things with the ball in hand that Johns could only dream of.

Johns performed kicks that Lockyer could only dream of.

Johns head on defence was better than Lockyers.

Lockyers cover defence was better than Johns.

Johns was slow, Lockyer is/was fast.

I think it comes down to the type of footballer you prefer in their respective positions.

As a half back, I rate Langer and Stuart better than Johns.

That said, neither of those two were as versatile to cover other positions like Johns could.

Johns was great but others were better and Lockyer is one of those.
Thats something i actually loved about Johns. He wasnt an athlete in the slightest. Had a bit of size I guess, particularly later years, but not particularly quick or even fit by modern standards, yet he had the sharpest footballing mind. Always a few plays ahead of the game, always putting players through holes, creating space and, like the true champions, would dictate the pace the game was played at - slowed the game to exactly what he needed.

I'd have Johns as number one of the players I have seen, with Fittler and Lockyer the next couple.
 

Tommy Smith

Referee
Messages
21,344
I'm not a Knights btw...in fact i hated the Knights and Joey because we (Roosters) had quite the rivalry with them during the glory days of Fittler v Johns.

But i am a Rugby League fan and i still maintain that Joey is on another level to Lockyer. The Knights fans in this thread are actualy being quite generous in suggesting that there's not much between them.

I however, as an objective observer not being a fan of the Broncs or Knights and being a Pom, can say without any bias that there isn't one thing that Lockyer does on a field better than Johns. And there isn't no shame in that either.

And im not pulling any punches about saying it either, especially when in opposition you have 'tards saying crap like "Joey couldn't make those around him look as good", "Joey could only dream of doing things with the ball in hand that Lockyer does" LOL!, and my favourite "if you want someone who can pull a win from an unloseable position every 5 years then pick Johns." Yeah, because he only turned up and pulled a rabbit out of the hat once every 5 years!

I mean seriously, anyone would think that we're talking about Matt Orford in this thread had his name been bleated out if you listened to the QLDers; rather than the guy who was named Halfback in the Team of the Century ahead of all-time greats like Duncan Thompson, Keith Holman and Peter Sterling despite only being a few years into retirement.
 
Last edited:

RABK

Referee
Messages
20,694
Are some of you in this thread fair dinkum? Are we talking football or is this a business/marketing thread?

The logic boggles the mind.

Let's move this past a Lockyer vs Johns thing and apply your logic to just one sporting example.

Serene Williams > Monica Seles: No contest because Serena had a longer more distinguished career due to better luck with various factors? Wrong. Seles was the single most talented female player to ever hold a racket and won 8 of the last 9 Grand Slams she entered smashing Steffi Graff all over the place before a crazed Graff fan stabbed her and ruined her career.

Anyone who has a clue about tennis will tell you that if their life depended on a womens Tennis Match they would choose pre tragedy Seles over anyone - regardless of how much longer their career spanned and more tournaments they won. What fate dished up Seles does not change her from been the greatest of all time in most experts views.


Live in the current moment and Lockyer is fresh in the mind, so people will be naive in the views on such a comparison. But if my life depended on a football game - Club, Origin or International - Johns would be first picked, well ahead of Lockyer - and 90% of you would do the same if it came down to it.

Talk marketing image, length of career and leading a near unbeatable team all you want - Johns did things on a football field Lockyer could train to do for 5 years and still not do. Johns is a dickhead but could not control the fate dished up to him regarding injuries so who are you kidding - an Injury free Johns would not also rack up 30+ Origins and Internationals with 6 or 7 series wins? I suppose Andrew Ryan is a better player than Nik Kosef too just because he's stayed injury free and is a good captain and role model? Or Mark Hughes is better than ET and Gasnier because of his premierships? I mean heck - Tendulkar or Ponting > Bradman going by your logic!

The logic behind your argument is just so f**king wrong. If you worded it to keep it just to Lockyer > Johns as captain and Mr Image - fair game. But to say Lockyer > Johns as a package is a wank.

Lockyer is such a great player but don't overate him. In a team sport it's so easy to use what Lockyers achieved in great sides as a base for a Lockyer > Johns argument but if you insist on that all i know is Johns beat Lockyer 10-4 when Origin was very competitive.

As an individual player Johns is simply better than Lockyer, last time i looked this is not marketing 101 - this is Rugby League.
 
Last edited:

RABK

Referee
Messages
20,694
With that been said as a player i have never considered Lockyer to be on Daley, Langer or Fittler's level - i do now consider him to be on that tier now. Only Johns and Lewis sit higher.
 

RABK

Referee
Messages
20,694
Sorry the Origin Record is 10-5 in Johns favor with 3 Series wins to Johns, 1 to Lockyer and 2 drawn - this is when Origin was very competitive.

Johns still holds a much higher winning percentage to Lockyer too - we are comparing players/leaders/game winners right... not teams? Haha. Johns sits around 60% Origin win rate. After 2 wins this year Lockyer has finally won more Origins than he has lost - awesome team arround him and sh*t blues side to face and all.
 

1 Eyed TEZZA

Coach
Messages
12,420
I never got to see the King in his prime, but I havent seen many players able to control a game quite like Johns. In every aspect of it. Wally Lewis was complete. Had it all and a bag of tricks. Johns was the same IMO.

Joey could absorb a game plan like no other, coaches often say that was his best aspect.

When talking Immortals, I think that title should go to players that had a forever lasting impact on the competition. Like Churchills taking on the line through defenders, Raper, Provan and the rest of that Dragons foward pack, they had to introduce a 4 tackle rule to stop their dominance, the way Coote would run lines through the defence, Fultons near perfect timing when chiming into attack , of course Wally Lewis and the impact he had on the Origin arena, the security he gave his team mates, and then theres Joey, his kicking game was revolutionary. The control he had on the ball was magnificent, and let alone his vision, passing skill etc etc, his kicking game made him a fullbacks worst nightmare. Another thing on Joey, he was able to bring the best out of his team mates, get them the ball in situations where their abilities would be best served. I point to Matt Gidley being a prime example there.

Lockyer to me isnt the complete player in my eyes. You could put Johns in a defence line and be sure that he wont be a liability, but Lockyer still has that about him, defence wise id much refer Johns. In attack Lockyer was and is still the greatest opportunist in the game. When ever there has been a sniff of blood, Lockyer was right there to capitolise. But he doesnt have that aura that the other immortals had. If Lockyer is better then Johns, then so is Fittler, Daley, Stuart, Langer, Lewis and Sterlo.

Jarryd Haynes form late last year was something special, but the best players keep reinventing themselves and continue to dominate.
 
Last edited:

Big Pete

Referee
Messages
29,039
It's not really as cut and dry as some of you (Lockyer and Johns fans) are making it out to be. For starters really it's a subjective argument and it depends on the type of player you prefer, a strong half like Johns, or an athletically gifted player like Lockyer. Either way, you really can't go wrong.

I'm not a fan of this thread largely because I don't see what last night's performance had to do with Lockyer being a better player than Johns.

Also, Johns did play in some very good teams in his day. The way some of you guys carry on that he ever carried a side single handily still makes me chuckle.

All laughs aside, I never feel compelled to take these threads too seriously. What's the point in defending somebody with words? When they can do it with actions on a consistent basis? Both Johns and Lockyer have done this on the field and as fans we have been very fortunate.
 

Big Pete

Referee
Messages
29,039
Sorry the Origin Record is 10-5 in Johns favor with 3 Series wins to Johns, 1 to Lockyer and 2 drawn - this is when Origin was very competitive.

Johns still holds a much higher winning percentage to Lockyer too - we are comparing players/leaders/game winners right... not teams? Haha. Johns sits around 60% Origin win rate. After 2 wins this year Lockyer has finally won more Origins than he has lost - awesome team arround him and sh*t blues side to face and all.

Spot the double standard.

Lockyer's record should be taken with a grain of salt because of his opposition. But Johns' record is fine. Even though he featured when Queensland were torn apart by Super League and played against some average looking Queensland sides.

Not taking anything away from Johns, Origin is Origin, but let's be fair here.
 

1 Eyed TEZZA

Coach
Messages
12,420
I agree with Pete.

Both players have a complete skillset, close enough to complete anyway and both players can win you a game by themselves, what more can they do to prove that one is better then the other? There is no definative tool of measurement to decide who is better.
 

RABK

Referee
Messages
20,694
Spot the double standard.

Lockyer's record should be taken with a grain of salt because of his opposition. But Johns' record is fine. Even though he featured when Queensland were torn apart by Super League and played against some average looking Queensland sides.

Not taking anything away from Johns, Origin is Origin, but let's be fair here.


???


...



???





:lol:



Lockyer, Langer, Webcke, Tallis, Sailor, Civoneceva, Walters, Price, Carroll, Renouf, Smith, Sing, McKenna, Tuqiri, Rogers.

Some of the players that would have played beside, most of them a bulk part, Lockyer when Johns was opposite Lockyer between 1998-2005. Yup a terrible time for QLD stock wise and a team we can certainly compare Creagh, Gidley and co to.


You are normally a good poster Pete, but you lost the plot on the 'torn apart QLD team' line.

The current NSW side would kill for the class of 2 or 3 of the players i named above.
 

1 Eyed TEZZA

Coach
Messages
12,420
Lockyer, Langer, Webcke, Tallis, Sailor, Civoneceva, Walters, Price, Carroll, Renouf, Smith, Sing, McKenna, Tuqiri, Rogers.

Some of the players that would have played beside, most of them a bulk part, Lockyer when Johns was opposite Lockyer between 1998-2005. Yup a terrible time for QLD stock wise and a team we can certainly compare Creagh, Gidley and co to.


You are normally a good poster Pete, but you lost the plot on the 'torn apart QLD team' line.

The current NSW side would kill for the class of 2 or 3 of the players i named above.

He also played in a time where Danial Wagon was the Queensland five eight...... says alot dont you think?
 

RABK

Referee
Messages
20,694
Lockyer
Rogers
Bowman
Sing
Sailor
Ikin
Lam
Webcke
Hetherington
Lang
Tallis
McKenna
Smith

O'Niell
Thorn
Carroll
Greenhill


That is the QLD side thrashed 56-16 in Game 3 of 2000 and i have no doubts that side would beat the current Blues side handsomely.
 
Top