I don't think anyone degenerating Schoey is arguing he was not gifted. You can be a gifted loser.

Why didn't Schoey sign for Wigan? The real reason might be an indication that he is a loser.

I doubt Schofield's list of personal achievements were a recognition of him being a loser.

He was IMO a 'champion' player but as he played in a team sport rather than an individual discipline he was reliant on much more than he could ever contribute on his own.

I don't reall if Wigan were ever interested but they tended to be in world class players and Schofield was proven in that regard at both International level and in domestic football in both hemispheres. Perhaps they and he were never in the same place at the same time.

That's right but the 'Gifted Loser' played a blinder didn't he.

He played a lot of rugby though. By the time he was 27 (when he was "making way" for Holroyd) he must have had 12 or 13 seasons worth if you think he was straight into the Hull first team at 18 and also played summers in Australia. Add to that the drinking cluture in the sport and you get a heck of a lot of mileage on the clock. He was also nearly put out of the game altogether as I remember with an inner ear problem (remember the scrum cap he wore at the time?). Hanley (as we seem to be comparing the two) was later into the game at top level. Hanley was a real athelete, and looked after himself, but Schofield was a better footballer. Let's be real here, if we had signed Hanley instead of Wigan - like we tried to - Hanley would have won sweet FA as well, and likewise if Schoey had gone to Wigan he would have a lock-up full of medals.

1995 Challenge Cup pre match antics and game display - loserville.

Not disagreeing DHM - just pointing out that not winning anything certainly shouldn't detract from Hanley's performances for us (as someone suggested). I also think the same is true of Schofield BTW.

I agree Schoey had played a lot of RL by a youngish age, but I think the fact that he didn't seem to push himself as often as he should probably contributed to his decline and inability to then turn it on in finals. Offsetting Schoey's early start would be the fact that Hanley also played in the pack, and for Leeds at least, aged 30+ was willing and able to take drives into the heart of the defence (which he really shouldn't have needed to do being the size he was).

I also repeat that I couldn't care less what Schoey says as a 'pundit' - he's trying to carve out a career by being controversial/forthright or whatever, and good luck to him.

There's a lot more to being a champion than just playing ability.

On the flip side of your argument, you could wonder, legitimately in my opinion, what Leeds' '95 side would have been like if Schofield was swapped for the vastly less gifted Edwards. The fact that it's a team sport rather than an individual discipline also means that 'champion' players have to give things to the team beyond just their natural ability. The old "side before self" bit. I couldn't tell you whether Schoey did that or not, but it is that aspect of being a great player in a team sport that I think some are questioning.

From my point of view, I remember him as the best player I saw at Leeds in my youth, and I idolised him.

All I would say is that my recollection will always be that he was a great player but won't inhabit the same level of the podium as players like Sinfield, JJB, McGuire and Burrow (I could go on and on but you get the idea) who were not just part players in our recent golden era but were right at the beating heart of that success, because they belonged to, and created, the team spirit that has made this side so special. That need not be a criticism of Schoey, but in my mind it has made some of his previous niggling about them in the press disappointing, but also a bit on the petty, jealous and bitter side.

If he hadn't been such a boyhood hero then I wouldn't care that he was a rent-a-gob, but it still disappoints me that he insists on making a living (and I know he has to somehow) by making unnecessary controversial comments to the press. With his standing as a player, he could, I firmly believe, have made a career for himself as the sort of pundit and commentator that people could actually respect. There is the crux of my disappointment. Not what he may, or may not, have done in the early 90s.

I [ican[/i tell you. He didn't. In fact, he expended quite a lot of energy to ensure it was self before side. Some might say those were some of his reasons for not Signing for a truly professional outfit like Wigan. Some might also say he might have had practical difficulties getting to training.

On a completely unrelated theme, multiple drink driving bans are for winners!

I'll bring out my old story posted before, about the time my cousin bought his house. Left behind was a lot of RL memorabilia, nearly all Leeds things. Across posters and the like some had the words **stards written all over them and ****holes.

It showed me that day just how high he thought of his time at Leeds.

You can read a lot into the make up of a person by knowing the sister of his ex wife who died of cancer, notably about his behaviour at the time.

It also tells you a lot the Daryl Powell was preferred at 6 to Schofield by many of his GB team mates. Daryl is exactly the type of person who they wanted in the trenches with them whereas Schoey......

We need to detach Schofield the player from Schofield the person.

One was a very talented, skillful man who justly received many accolades.

One is a complete tosspot who has failed to make anything of his post playing days and has to resort to scrounging a few coppers by spouting as much controversial bollox as he can get paid for.

That's also my view. But in the same way that he probably sold himself short as a player, I'd suggest he's doing the same as a pundit. Schofield actually has some very valid observations on the modern game; were he to combine his opinions with some honest self-appraisal he might actually encourage more people to think about the points he makes in greater depth than they do currently.