If it were purely on skill set, Schofield hands down

Regards

King James

He could only pass one way.

That was at Leeds long before he arrived and long after he left. I wasn't until GH arrived that it changed.

They tried, but Schofield turned them down.

In his twilight on one leg: https://www.richarddelariviere.co.uk/?p=713

In his twilight on one leg: https://www.richarddelariviere.co.uk/?p=713

He was still part of the problem.

Schofield for me.

We'll never know, but it would have been interesting to see how Schofield would have gone in the Wigan side at that time and how Edwards would have gone in the Leeds side. I reckon Schofield would have done even better than Edwards with the better players around him and Edwards less well than Schofield did with the Leeds players around him.

But ATEOD both very talented players.

Agreed. Edwards never really dominated a game at Test level. He had one decent series at home to NZ in 89 but that's it. Schofield was much more impressive at that level.

I very much doubt that.

But if he did turn them down it probably was because he wouldn't have been first choice at Wigan in that era.

You take a tour of Schoey's medals you take a ten second tour. You take a tour of Edwards medal collection then book yourself in for a ten hour tour.

I think that sums up who the better player was.

Plus people are banging on about Schofield's international career but how many Ashes series or World Cups did he help us win?

He'd just won the golden boot, and won MOS the following year, I'm certain he would've been first choice.

As someone has already noted Ian Kirke has a box full of medals but if he's one of the finest props this country has ever produced then I despair. You're logic is uttely flawed, Wigan the team won the bulk of those medals not Edwards the individual.

This is made even odder by the fact that you contradict yourself in the last sentence - how many test victories did Edwards lead us two - answer - same number as Schofield because it was the team that failed not the individuals.

That's absolutely crazy logic to apply to a team sport. You could go through lots of team sports and find plenty of examples that would illustrate just how ridiculous it is to use medals won as a yardstick for how good a certain player is/was.

Edwards by an absolute street.

He played for a Wigan side in 1983 that was by no means great. Williams, Ramsdale, stephenson, Julliffe, Gill, Foy, Fairhurst, Shaw,Kiss,Case,Dunn, Wane, Pendlebury. Yet with a 17 year old shaun edwards at full back they got to the 1984 Challenge cup final.

Schofield joined a great Hull side with Kemble, Leului, Sterling, Steve evans, fred ah kuoi, Lee Crooks, Steve Norton, John Muggleton.

Schofield was ok but not in Edwards class as either a player or a leader. Plus Schofield could only pass right to left. V Poor for a stand off.

I see scoffer as a bit of a legend tbh, like Hanley, Gregory, Offiah, Lydon.
Mebbe that's the thing with Edwards, over shadowed by other team members.
A Wigin fan is always gonna hold some affinity for a home team player, but from the outside looking in, as good as he was Edwards didn't grab you like the other stars of the game did back in the day.
As a fan of neither Leeds or Wigin, Scoffer sits right up there, with Edwards not far behind, but definitely behind.

I think you are being a little harsh here. We last won the World Cup in 1972 and have had 9 competitions since. We last won an Ashes series in 1970(I saw the 3 games living here in Sydney) and have lost all 13 since. Hardly a relevant guide to assess a player's ability is it?