Personally I don't think he's the best overseas signing [icurrently[/i at the club, never mind since Sterling. O'Meley has been better, and probably Manu. Fitzgibbon just happens to play in a style that racks up impressive tackle statistics with our current setup.

If we're talking best overseas signing of the past 20 years, for me it's Swain followed by Smith.

Swain, Kearney, Barnett Snr all way better than Fitz and more influential.

Berrigan came over in pretty much the peak of his career were as Fitz didn't. There was alot more hype over the Berrigan signing, the guy was world class in a number of positions, it may not have worked out but he was certainly a bigger signing IMO.

I think there's a difference between having a say and calling the shots. Every player should be encouraged to have input and listened to, and players of Fitzgibbon's stature in particular. However, no player, regardless of ability/playing record/medal collection/tactical insight/whatever, should be making decisions on team selection and/or tactics.

IMO, you make your opinions known, but do the job that is asked of you, whoever you are.

I am not for one minute saying that this definitely is going on BTW, this is just my opinion on how far player influence should go.

Disagree, Fitz is a bigger signing than Berrigan.

I would have Fitz up there with Sterling, Swain and Smith.

Kearney and Barnett were undoubted quality, I agree, but I think it's tough to rate them way better and more influential than him when they were both one-season wonders. Better signings for us, but not by that much.

In terms of performance?

I would probably agree with that , I think Fitzy was more well known here than berro when we signed him . Who would you say would be on par with fitzy or above if we signed someone ? ,lockyer ? Slater ? I no not likely but fitzy was a legend of the NRL

In terms of size of signing.

Out of curiosity, why?

I personally wouldn't have him in the same league as the other 3. The only outstanding feature of his career is that of being the NRL leading point-scoring forward, but ATEOTD that is mainly a tribute to his goal-kicking ability, which he doesn't do for us. Other than that, he's just been a very good, solid, forward for the duration of his career.

Have to agree to disagree I guess. And to mention Fitz in the same company as Sterling is laughable imho.

Has Fitz ever changed a game on his own?

Two different types of players, Sterlings role was to change games and do something magic. Fitz is a workhorse who grafts for the side, without the likes of him then Sterling does not get to do his magic. He has been consistent with his performances for over a decade and been recognised as one of the best leaders in the game.

I would go as far as to say it is an honour to see him in a black and white shirt.

He's a bloke doing his (well paid) job to a high standard, why is seeing him "an honour", it's not like he's done 4 tours of Iraq, 3 tours of Afghanistan and won a medal for conspicuous bravery!!!!

Whatever.