Andy Gregory would waltz into any current Superleague team

I personally can't argue against Johns - in my opinion he didn't have a weakness in his game. His vision and reading of a game was second to none, his passing game was superb, he revolutionised kicking out of hand, was a real strong runner and a great defender too - couple that with being the ultimate competitor, and I believe he takes it. He also wasn't afraid to rough it up and get stuck in when needed either - always a quality I've liked to see in a half back - he could never be bullied. Thurston is also a very good player, but nowhere near as good defensively as Johns or with ball in hand.

These arguments are always subjective, but I try and base my thoughts on a few of things - the first being was the player head and shoulders above his peers at the time and did he change the way the game was played. Finally, I try and take out natural physique and build as a factor as a true GREAT would have excelled without these advantages - so for instance Meninga wouldn't be up there for me, as a major factor in his ability was his size/physique against his peers at that time. Someone like Andrew Johns or Alan Langer are much more deserving for me in these arguments, as in theory, they're starting from a disadvantage physically and were still superstars.

As for British players, Hanley was awesome, but like Meninga, his pure physical advantage set him apart anyway (though he was also one of the best readers of the game). As a Leeds fan who started watching at the beginning of the 80's, I'll always give Schoey a nod in this sort of argument. Forget his persona and off field attitude towards fitness and sometimes his teammates - he was awesome for Leeds (carried us on his own for many years surrounded by utter gash), GB and also during his stint in the NRL. He was an excellent runner ball in hand, great vision, could pick the right passes and had a good kicking game too - wasn't a shoddy defender either. For me, his only in game weakness was he couldn't pass one way, so had to turn his back to throw the pass - though he used that to his advantage many a time, using his body to shield whether he'd passed or dummied and gone himself.

Going back a couple of generations - my old Grandad would have put Lewis Jones above anyone - obviously I never saw him play, but his reputation at Leeds is legendary.

Billy Boston picking an ex-wiganer, shock horror.

Correct.

Many people's pick for the greatest player, Wally Lewis on Gregory:-

So, which English player caused Lewis and his teammates the most problems?
“A certain little halfback! That little b****rd! I admired Andy Gregory as much, if not more, than any other player because of the creativity that he boasted and the determination to cause defeat for Australia. He was also one of the toughest players that I ever played against.
“I also got on with Andy very well off the field, and with his mother too. I struggled with his accent, always telling him to slow down! With him in charge and at his best, they got as close as they could to beating us.
“His performance in that third game was a big problem for us but, even so, it was a performance to be admired. We were lucky to get out of jail that day.

Gregory in his prime would tear SL defences to shreds.

Johns was a great player, but my opinion of him will always be somewhat tainted by the night he spent in Danny Brough's pocket in the 2005 playoffs.

Wally Lewis and Alex Murphy. I can't separate them

Right. BB isn't just some random Wigan player. Plenty of people regard him as the best ever.

That may be so, but he's about as impartial as Phil Clarke or Shaun Wane.

Him picking Kenny is akin to me picking Schofield (although I didn't pick Schoey).

It's not akin to anything you say. BB is a legend of the game and you're an anonymous person posting on the internet. His opinion is worth 1000x more than yours.

Keith Beauchamp

If we judged the best by players who were ahead of their time then you'd have to put Vince Karalius and Bob Fulton at the top of the list.

Players ahead of their time shouldn't count since they're not tested against comparable opposition.

It is possible to have a greatest ever RL player but there has to be a method by which greatest ever RL player is defined.

Until there is a definition this is all moot and I stand by my choice of Keith Beauchamp.

I'm too young to have seen Wigan's 8 cup wins in a row but i have seen videos of the games and the one player who stood out to me was Andy Gregory. He had skill the current england halves can only dream of.

In preparation for the game tomorrow I watched highlights of the few times we've beaten the aussies. One of them was the game where mike gregory ran the length of the field to win it in 88 i think. That try, as well as two others, was set up by Andy Gregory. As usual he was head and shoulders above.

It's interesting to note that most people state that the best players are either half backs or loose men. As loose men used to be creative and not additional props.

Yet some of the greatest players of all time have worn the number 8, 9, 10, 11 & 12 shirts without ever really getting the appreciation they deserved. It's these guys who laid the platform for the Lewis, Gregory, Johns, Hanley (depending on the position he played) etc to play so well. Yet when it comes to the honours and the accolades they rarely feature.

I've watched the game since the mid 70s and I've seen some truly great players. But only a handful who I really looked forward to watching (out of a Hull shirt). Hanley was my first non Hull hero. Never forget watching him and meeting him. Lewis was awesome (all be it not so good for Trinity or was he too far ahead of his team mates). The Aussie teams of 78 & 82 were full of amazing players.
That said many of the Aussie teams I've seen have had fantastic players in who I feel privileged to have watched.
I've always loved the Kiwis and feel the team of 1980 had some extraordinary talent which gets very little recognition compared to today's greats. Obviously the Hull teams benefited greatly from some of them. Fred Ah Kuoi in his prime was brilliant although his stint in the NRL apparently wasn't so great.
All said and done the five who have given me the greatest pleasure are Knocker Norton, Peter Sterling, Ellery Hanley, James Leuluai and Darren Lockyer.
Not sure any could be absolutely the greatest ever. Today's game is so different to the one I grew up with. I find it amazing how half backs create so little today with 10metres + to play with yet Sterlo, Gregory, Lewis, Millward, Hepworth created so much with so little space.

But I honestly couldn't argue against any that have been mentioned in this thread. Just think of the engine room when thinking about true greats. (Not that I've mentioned many Hahaha)

The reason half backs struggle to create space these days is because it's a fully professional sport, the defences are superbly drilled and the players are awesome athletes. A few extra yards doesn't compensate for this. Also I would argue people get misty eyed over the past and only remember the pieces of brilliance from these players. Peter Sterling was capable of brilliant things but he clearly didn't lead the defence a merry dance every time he had the ball. Probably 95% of what he did got dealt with, but people remember the 5% and so it gets talked about as if it were the norm.

Almost every elite sportsperson will tell you what got them to the top and delivered that extra 1%, or millisecond, or marginally faster reaction is practice, practice, practice, absolute commitment and a little luck. You also need that extra drive, the sort of intensity that sees some players such as Burgess, Graham, and in past times Farrell, Sculthorpe and others being the ones the always seemed to drop on the loose ball or make the last ditch tackle.

For me that is true of any generation. Yes, today's defences are more disciplined and organised than ever, but a good player should still stand out. As a Wigan fan I've watched Gregory and Edwards, and later Green and Smith conduct the team around the park and suddenly go at the line when the tiniest gap opens up - sometimes it comes off, sometimes it doesn't, but they see it and that's what counts. In recent years Barrett is the best I've seen. Hanley didn't always break the line, neither did Meninga or Lewis. As Mr.ZH says, 95% might not come off, but the 5% is what counts. At the highest level very few would manage 1%.

The very best have developed (from practice) that 'sense' - they can tell from the players in their direct and peripheral vision when the line has fragmented just enough to step, or show & go, or hold the ball up, or throw the killer pass, but they can also organise and direct their teams, make the simple plays, they can defend and they have that intensity and drive. In some cases the fact they go out of their way to support makes them valuable - Edwards was probably the best support player, Hanley was no slouch.

If Gregory could have got his head round the modern professional regime he'd have struggled no more than Burrow or Brough have. Gregory was a prodigious talent and with the correct conditioning he'd still have been a fantastic player. Same goes for many others.

Best players I've seen? Hanley, Meninga, Fittler in that order.

Again, why would you think that Gregory, in a modern environment and having to deal with modern defences would be so far ahead of the top players currently?

I think it's massively disrespectful and frankly shows a lack of understanding of the modern game to think that way.

As I said, don't confuse better to watch with better standard.

If you watch footage of Aussie GFs from even 20 years ago its plain to see that not a single forward from either team back then would be first grade today - the defences have huge gaps on almost every tackle. That's down to simple fitness. As a result halfbacks and outside backs had far more room even when the defence was only 5m back, making them look better/different as well.

Players today are far bigger then they used to be. It was quite funny seeing Sam Burgess standing next to John Sattler after the GF - Sattler in his prime would have been 20-30 kilos lighter than Burgess and far less fit. If you could time travel today's players would physically smash past players out of the park.

Size has also increased in the backs. I remember when Eric Grothe was considered enormous at 14 and a half stone. Meninga terrorised defences on the 82 tour when he was less than 16 stone (he put on a lot of weight later of course).

Its impossible to do anything other than rate players in their own era. Who knows if a 13 stone second row from the 60s could ever have beefed up enough to be 'great' today when a lot is down to childhood nutrition?

Completely impossible to say, but some of the best players I have seen are.

Andy Gregory
Gary schofield
Ellery Hanley
Wally Lewis
Brett Kenny
Brad fittler
Peter sterling
Mal meninga
Andrew johns

Who is "Brett Jenny?" Do you mean "me darlin' sportin' Jenny" from the old Irish folk song "Whiskey in the Jar?"

I'd also argue that nobody can state for certain what players from yesteryear as without the TV coverage we didn't see the players (other than the ones who played for our teams) week in week out. I think I saw just about all of Peter Sterlings games for Hull and even his average games were better than the best of most.
That 95 / 5% is true of just about every player. Certainly true today. A video montage of a player on you tube can make players look like world beaters. The reality is often totally different.

It all makes for great debate though.

Based on the players I've seen (either live or on TV) over the last twenty years, I'd say the Paul brothers should both be in contention. Neither of them could be controlled on their day.

Impossible to compare between different era's, also between different positions

If pushed to a name, for a couple of years in the early 80's John Woods was the most ' Complete ' RL player on the planet with top quality at every skill and physical attribute, and also able to perform full of Tetleys mild as well

Okayyyyy......