Murphy was the best half-back of his era, and Johns was the best of his. It is a complete waste of time trying to compare them - the game changes continually (not always for the better) and different skills become more (or less) important. Both players contributed a great deal to the game.

I not sure Murph was exactly a man without any vices.

As rugby league fans we know only to well of the effects of depression.

they didnt have es back then.

when alex was playing the game ill bet people that smoked were considered rebels.

true but the modern day player is a much better athlete than 40 years ago

full time training.

the game is faster now.

skills like the spiral pass are now considered normal.

the skill level of RL today is light years ahead of then.

stupid comparison.

Did you ever see Murphy play? No. Right, how can YOU compare then?

But that's just the development of the sport. Murphy was only part-time professional. He also played on pitches that were total bogs at times, he played a huge amount of games a year compared to what they play now and got less protection from referees. What they did have in that era was natural ability. You can only compare players from different eras on what they achieved in their own time. Murphy tore the Aussies apart aged 18 and then went back in '62 and did it again. He is regarded as the greatest player in British RL's greatest post war era and he also lead 3 different sides to victory at Wembley. Johns is the greatest player I have ever seen but for me Murphy is the greatest player ever to have played the sport, or rugby for that matter.

i can compare them on the basis of what ive said above

the sport theyd played in 1960 was a whole lot easier than the sport they play today.

interesting reading.

id have thought ellery was the greatest player englands produced myself.

A friend of mine doesn't rate Hanley at all, personal reasons are clouding his judgement, but what he says about Hanley is true. He wasn't a particularly good passer of the ball and he wasn't a good kicker.

Still the best I've seen though.

Murphy was a genius - simply the finest half back this country has ever produced - his change of pace was incredible - as was ability to read the game.

For me Wally Lewis and Brett Kenny were both superior players to Johns.

That's a good summation for me.

There can only be one winner...

Murphy!

Johns might find himself more than halfway down the top ten list of greatest halfbacks ever.

I didn't bother with much detail earlier but Murphy's record is superb:-

1958 cutting up Australia
1960 World Cup winner
1962 cutting up Australia
1962 cutting up St George mid- 11 year straight title run
1966 refused to tour Aus/NZ when not given captaincy
1971 Leigh win CC
1974 Warrington win CC

1966 was one of the closest series ever...no Murphy was a massive loss for GB.

A stretch of high quality between 1958-1974 is a fair achievement for any player. He should have played more Tests in the end than he did.

What does 'cutting up Australia' entail exactly?

Easier in what way? You mean they are quicker and stronger? Of course in the physical side of the game players of that era would struggle now because they were part time but why do we always compare eras by todays standards? Flip it the other way, how would Johns or any modern player cope with training only twice a week on a Tuesday and Thursday after a days difficult work, touring for 3 months playing a full catalogue of difficult games, the 5 yard rule meaning you needed skill to break the line not just using bulldozing forwards to eat up easy yards. Look at the 3rd Test in 1963 and say the game is 'easier' now, whatever that means.

Literally that.

Murphy single-handedly threatened the defence in 1958 and 1962 in a way Johns never did in his career. He literally tore holes in our (Australia's) defence including from defensive positions.

Millward?

Lockyer is better than Johns. More versatile and a better leader. cannot compare him to Murphy as it is impossible to make comparisons over such different era's.

For me Johns is one of the finest players I have ever seen.
But in saying that I personally think Brett Kenny is a better player.
My Dad and Grandad say that Murphy is the best RL player of all time.

I too have always been told from being a child that Murphy is the greatest RL player of all time by my Dad and both Grandads. Lockyer is probably the best player i've seen but i'm not particularly old.

Whether or not these older generation players were better than Johns I dont know, not seen them play never even seen clips of them play however, what Johns did to this sport was improve the standards set, kids looked up to him, they wanted to be just like him and the fact he spent longer on the training pitch than most players just so he was the best at what he did shows to me that he was a great player and deserves to be spoken of in the same thread as all these other great players.

As for his indescresions, having worked in a city centre bar I can quite honestly say there are a LARGE percentage of those that go out on a weekend take something that is illegal. Quite obviously these drugs did nothing to stop Johns being one of the greatest ever players to play this sport.

Genius five-eighth.

Probably between him, Bolton and Horne for the all-time best England 5/8th.

the pace of the game is so much faster, you have to run more, make more tackles

the skills of the opposing players is so much better so its much harder to stand out for a star player

the model T ford was the best car in its day but today a ferrari would kill it.