Quote: "It's only his media profile that made him seem like a prat.
As a player he was one of the best of his generation. Only Hanley eclipsed him....mainly because he was a better athlete than rugby player.
To go to Oz and be well regarded there when still quite young was an outstanding thing to do.
In addition even with his Media persona, whenever I've seen him in person I've found him a thoroughly nice and respectful guy.
The issues he is having now are awful and I wish him all the best.'"
I think Hanley eclipsed him because not only was he a better athlete he was also a better influence in the dressing room. Both players were the best we had in that era (although you could put Offiah in there too IMO). Schofield, was top class as a centre in 84-89 and then the best stand off in the world in 89-92.
His media persona used to annoy a lot of people and I often disagreed with him. However, there is a real need for someone who offers that point of difference and challenges the status quo. Schofield was the only pundit that did that, maybe because he was an outsider he felt he could get away with it. Outside of his immediate buddies he had at Leeds and Hull (Crooks, Maskill, Creasser etc) he didn't seem to have a lot of friends in the game.
We do need a few more pundits to step up like he did. It's a job that requires a thick skin and it needs to be somebody who's got a good record as a player - it doesn't need to be someone as great as Schofield was just decent. For example Chris Sutton is a good contrarian pundit on for the football. He doesn't care who he annoys but makes his points well.
Hopefully Schofield gets the treatment and care he needs so he can make the best of things.
by 
