The Garry Schofield Column: Where have all the English halfbacks gone?

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, George Watt said:

On the playing front would disagree on that and would rank Schofield just ahead of Millward. Loved watching Millward when he had a short stint with Cronulla when I supported them in the 70's. Another I would include with these 2 would be Dave Bolton who I saw winning 2 Challenge Cup finals plus a NRL Premiership in Aus.

I can't recall seeing Dave Bolton that much I was only 11 when he went Aus but have heard so much about him, but unlike Bronco I would much sooner rely on my own interpretation than heresay.

[koli]

I think we have suffered heavily in the backs from the growing dominance and huge money available in soccer.

Talented boys who 50 years ago might have chosen rugby over soccer are less likely to do so today.

 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Your "Roger played for my team" shouts loud and clear Bronco.

Me, well I have no axe to grind I am just taking an independent view on what I witnessed on the field, both great player's but we all have our own views on who we believe was the better, in fact I would say Roger was the best till Garry went to 6 for the national team.

Easy accusation to make. It is what it is. Like you say, we all have our own views and mine is mine. One things for sure though: Roger was a class act on and off the field, and contributed to the game in the widest sense. As a player he led teams to win the League, the Challenge Cup, and every UK trophy you can. He was in an international side that won the Ashes. Then he went on to a stellar coaching career. 

Schofield was a great player, I wholeheartedly agree, but other than that a bit of a tool who's done nothing for the game apart from play it - and then denigrate everyone that followed him. He only ever won the Yorkshire Cup and the Sydney mid-week floodlight competition. So yes, I prefer my choice! 

[daz39]

2 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Easy accusation to make. It is what it is. Like you say, we all have our own views and mine is mine. One things for sure though: Roger was a class act on and off the field, and contributed to the game in the widest sense. As a player he led teams to win the League, the Challenge Cup, and every UK trophy you can. He was in an international side that won the Ashes. Then he went on to a stellar coaching career. 

Schofield was a great player, I wholeheartedly agree, but other than that a bit of a tool who's done nothing for the game apart from play it - and then denigrate everyone that followed him. He only ever won the Yorkshire Cup and the Sydney mid-week floodlight competition. So yes, I prefer my choice! 

He did also win the Golden boot and Man of Steel too

Schofield was a huge signing for us back in the day and many believe Ken Davy's 1st influence shelling out the 6 figure sum to tempt him to the 2nd division, he was still a class act back then and his talent and experience no doubt enabled us to progress to the Super League, shame his coaching didn't match.

Unfortunately i'm too young to have watched Roger in the flesh but i've watched countless clips and videos of him, another great player, both these guys were world class players in their day and in their respective era, can you really say one is better than the other due to the different roles they played though?

Edited September 15, 2023 by daz39

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

49 minutes ago, daz39 said:

He did also win the Golden boot and Man of Steel too :).

Schofield was a huge signing for us back in the day and many believe Ken Davy's 1st influence shelling out the 6 figure sum to tempt him to the 2nd division, he was still a class act back then and his talent and experience no doubt enabled us to progress to the Super League, shame his coaching didn't match.

Unfortunately i'm too young to have watched Roger in the flesh but i've watched countless clips and videos of him, another great player, both these guys were world class players in their day and in their respective era, can you really say one is better than the other due to the different roles they played though?

Yes I know, I'm exaggerating a bit, and generally I agree its a bit pointless comparing eras, or even splitting hairs when two players are that good. What for? There's no doubt in my mind Schofield was a great player. But on this case I really do just think it's very hard to lay claim to being the best-ever in your position, a game-defining half-back position, when none of the teams you played for ever won an elite competition.

Michael Jordan wasn't the best ever because of the shots he made, he was the best ever because yes he did that but also he made the Chicago Bulls into an unbeatable force collectively. That's how I measure greatness. Messi dragged Argentina to win a World Cup, etc. etc. The greatest players enable their team to win things they may not otherwise have done. Millward did that, first as a player and then repeated it as a coach.