I deliberately didn't sing his praises with regards to his international performances. Merely mentioned he earned rep honours and been nominated. He had his best series at test level that year IIRC playing at hooker. I think most people recognise he has struggled to nail down any position at international level through a lack of pace and size.

I am not heralding him as a World class player, or as good as Hanley however he i still Leeds' greatest ever number 13 IMO, for all the reasons presented above.

I know you're probably only half serious but limited natural ability is harsh - he was recognised by the club as a talent from a very young age and although he has cetainly made the most of his ability that doesn't mean people who work hard and set high personal standards don't have some ability to begin with!

That's a sentence but it's late and you get my drift!

Sinfield has played 27 times for England/GB.

That's not a bad rep career however Keith may wish to paint it.

He might not have enjoyed significant successes against NZ and AUS but then again neither did Hanley in his 36 GB appearances.

I was recently watching an old Batley highlights DVD from the 1995 Centenary season, in which Dave Heron played 15-16 games for us. He was absolutely outstanding, scoring 7 or 8 tries at the age of 38 - one which featured a superb dummy and break from the halfway line and sprint to the posts for a score. He only had a relatively brief spell with the club, but I'd still stick him in by all-time favourite Batley XIII as one of the most talented players I've seen in our colours. His brother Wayne was a great player for us too, but the absolute antithesis of his brother! In short, Dave was the kind of classy footballer that we don't see in todays version of RL.

Having witnessed Hanley and Sinfield on numerous occasions playing their trade in the international arena both on home soil and down under, what is crystal clear is that Hanley never looked out of his depth playing against such world class opposition because he was an international and world class player himself. He played at the same level as the top Australian and Kiwi players. The same cannot be said for Sinfield who is a Super League standard player.

What is also apparent is that the national team was far more competitive with world class players like Hanley in the team. I don't recall the national team getting hammered 64-10, 52-4 or 46-16 when he was wearing the national shirt.

If Hanley was fit, he was always selected for GB/England. He was the first name on the team sheet. The same cannot be said for Sinfield who was dropped or not selected on several occasions by more than one coach. Even Tony Smith dropped him for the Semi Final of the RLWC of 2008 after his nightmare performances in Melbourne and Newcastle.

That's a significant difference in rep careers, no matter how G1 may wish to paint a picture of international equality and similarity between the two.

Completely agree (apart from the Moriarty elbow - glad that has mostly been removed from the game TBH). Most exciting game I've seen in ages was the Leeds/Saints home game two years ago (when Senior slapped Wilkin). A little bit of old school there, and set the scene for the GF nicely. Eddie and Stevo did the usual "this is all an outrage", "they've all lost the plot" while Phil Clarke sounded like he was knocking one out in pure pleasure.
I don't think the players aren't as tough as they were, I think they simply get it coached out of them.

Very true. It required a different order of courage/lunacy to take to the field in those days

Effort to disguise the weakness in your argument by fog knitting and changing the discussion duly noted.

Sinfield's displays for Leeds have been good enough to earn him rep honours 27 times so far in his career. For the purposes of this discussion that is all that is relevant, not how he played in those rep games,

It was shared for the first time, in 1988, between Peter Sterling and Hugh McGahan.

Being pedantic, Hanley won it in 1989, the first of only two British winners. The Aussie players and press were stunned when Andy Farrell got it in 2004, an absolute joke.

No one quibbled when when Hanley won it, partly because he had almost single-handedly taken Balmain to the 1988 grand final and then took the Lance Todd in 1989.

I guess it depends on your criteria. I think some people are picking a side thinking that Hanley at his best is better than Sinfield at his best, even though Hanley was at his best in 87-91 before he even joined Leeds. If you're picking under that criteria you could go for Bradley Clyde based on how he played in the early 90s for Canberra.

Looking at stand off does Cliff Lyons qualify as being better than McGuire based on two short spells with the club and winning one Yorkshire Cup? He does in my book but some may argue.

I acknowledge your efforts to restrict the terms of reference on the discussion in order to portray your selection of Sinfield in the best possible light.

Quote: miscreant "It was shared for the first time, in 1988, between Peter Sterling and Hugh McGahan. Being pedantic, Hanley won it in 1989, the first of only two British winners. The Aussie players and press were stunned when Andy Farrell got it in 2004, an absolute joke. No one quibbled when when Hanley won it, partly because he had almost single-handedly taken Balmain to the 1988 grand final and then took the Lance Todd in 1989.'" According to Wikipedia (agreed, it's not the most valuable source for accuracy)... [i"The award was founded in early 1985 by the British magazine Open Rugby and was awarded to Wally Lewis for his performances throughout 1984. Lewis and the other pre-1990 winners were initially recognised for the years that they collected the award, not for the year of their performances, but this was changed by Rugby League World magazine in 2010"[/i en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_Leag ... rd#Winners

Quote: miscreant "It was shared for the first time, in 1988, between Peter Sterling and Hugh McGahan. Being pedantic, Hanley won it in 1989, the first of only two British winners. The Aussie players and press were stunned when Andy Farrell got it in 2004, an absolute joke. No one quibbled when when Hanley won it, partly because he had almost single-handedly taken Balmain to the 1988 grand final and then took the Lance Todd in 1989.'" According to Wikipedia (agreed, it's not the most valuable source for accuracy)... [i"The award was founded in early 1985 by the British magazine Open Rugby and was awarded to Wally Lewis for his performances throughout 1984. Lewis and the other pre-1990 winners were initially recognised for the years that they collected the award, not for the year of their performances, but this was changed by Rugby League World magazine in 2010"[/i en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_Leag ... rd#Winners

Wasn't Schofield recently awarded one retrospectively for 1990?

Did he have a brother called Ian?

__________



That's not why I picked Hanley over Sinfield. Hanley spent four seasons at Headingley and in the final one of those scored 41 tries. Yes, Leeds didn't get to see the very, very best of Hanley but they still got to see a modern great going about his business with a focus and determination to succeed without equal.

It's a team sport and no single player, no matter how personally driven, can compensate for players around them who are not prepared to give 100%

I imagine Sinfield will be honoured to be mentioned in the same company.

The same can be said of Sinfield



I imagine Hanley too would be honoured to be mentioned in the same company as Sinfield.

Hanley was certainly a more powerful physical player than Sinfield. But Sinfield is certainly a more creative player than Hanley and a better passer with the ability put others into space and make regular scoring opportunities for others

I don't have a problem with anyone not sharing my opinion.

Sinfield had a better kicking game too.