Forgot him, I want to change my list.

Some people being seriously harsh on Lee Penny methinks.

People forget just how good a full back Johnson was.
Incredibly unlucky to be in the same era as Garry Jack, Graeme Eadie, Gary Belcher etc, as to get no international caps.
I can only remember him having one bad game for us ( v Wigan JPS 85, on the tele, too).
He came into the line, superbly (n.b. players COME into the line. They don't [ichime[/i into it. That's boll0cks). Had great speed (plenty of long range tries....LCCF 85. people always forget that one).
Great positioning, and a superb tackler ROUND THE LEGS.

That lot, 13 miles down the road, had rather a special FB at the time, too.

He was bloody good

Phil Veivers wasn't that good.....

I’m struggling to assess the relative merits of Hodgson v Ratchford bearing in mind the relative strengths of the teams they played in. There were so many playmakers in Hodgson’s team that he wasn’t targeted as much as Ratchford in my opinion. I will ponder.
Penny is tainted for me by that pointless bloody scrum “move” and the tendency to trail his boot when hurdling a try scorer.
I was gutted when Lyon left and his kicks to touch were like they were fired from a howitzer.
I didn’t see enough of Johnson to form an opinion as he was around in my “wilderness years” living on the south coast when there was virtually no press coverage of league down there.
To sum up I did do the list but the dog ate it.

1. Ratch
2. Hodgson (hands down the best fullback in this list but the end of his career and only 2 seasons with us)
3. Grose
4. Mathers
5. Reardon
6. Cardiss
7. Penny

I can only rate the ones I saw, maybe its harsh on penny but I don't remember him being good.

Johnson or hodgson at 1. That shouldn't even be up for debate. I can't split them if I'm honest. Then hesford and ratchford to scrap over the remaining top 4 places.

Plus he was the last player of that era to wear 'proper' rugby boots!

I'm enjoying the thread but the original proposition was along the lines of was Ratchford the best value for money SL era signing? Therefore I'd be judging him on that and take into account fee paid longevity quality of performance and impact on the team say leadership exemplar behaviour on and off the pitch and in Ratchford's case his ability to play in a variety of positions.
It wasn't simply a FB beauty parade going from Hesford to Ashton and on that basis he has to be up there.
As far as FBs are concerned I'd go with Johnson and Hesford equal first with Hodgson a midgies tackle in front of Ratchford but like others have said there may be a bit of rose tinted in there the teams they played in the style of rugby and the fact that everything was better in the 70s such as music and Waggon Wheels

Much as I liked Hesford and his phenomenal goal kicking, I always felt he looked the part but didn’t create much at all. Controversial I know.

i would agree in terms of output and longevity and form he's been up there in terms of value for money (lest we forget a large contingent on this board have also wanted him gone from the club during times of poor team form, not getting to high bombs, awol in defence, and holding the ball in one hand, personally, knee jerk over reactions)


He's a good steady player, but he's never been someone you would classify as a game breaker, he's not someone like a briers or a westwood that would/could individually crack a game open, and you'd be expecting or hoping for him to do it.

a good/excellent role player...legend? definitely wouldn't go that far.

I suspect that for a younger supporter he would be seen as far more significant than perhaps the slightly more mature fan does. Most of us view past players through a nostalgia filter, but if we are going to be brutally honest the majority of our players over the 40 years pre 2009 have been average at best, hence our lack of success over that time.

Just for old times sake, can I say Lee Briers was the best full back we ever had.....

Are you Steve Anderson in disguise????

Over the years we've been blessed with some great full backs.
Difficult to compare those from different eras because the role of the full back has changed considerably I feel - especially in the last decade.
I cant really decide on the order from Sallys list because I change my mind too much but I will throw in those that have impressed me over the years (only saw the 1st 2 a couple of times).

Whitehead, Hesford, Johnson, Lyon, Lee Penny, Gross, Mathers, Hodgson, Ratchford.

And I also really don't understand those that didn't rate Lee Penny - but each to their own. No problem.

Personally, I did rate Penny, it's just he never quite kicked on and failed to fulfil his early potential.

His early years in the side promised so much for him, it just never happened, though it probably never helped him that the club was going through such a turbulent time at the point where he should have been peaking.

Problem with Penny was that despite having a lot of raw skills, great pace, footwork, excellent tackler.....he was absolutely thick as mince (from a rugby perspective too) . I once witnsessed him and Warren Stevens playing a fruit machine in Snookers, they were pretty close to wrestling the thing to the ground. The combined IQ probably struggled to reach double figures.

Rugby, or even sporting, intelligence is an odd thing.

I had a friend who went to school with Shaun Edwards. Said he was absolutely thick. Could barely string a sentence together and was intellectually at zero.

On a rugby pitch though, he was as sharp as it comes and now, after his playing days are done, he is widely acknowledged as a world level rugby coach and that is in a code he has had to educate himself in, rather than it being something he grew up with.

Do agree though that some players are as thick on a pitch as off it.

This is where this forum excels. I know it could be considered “thread drift” but still... the vision of Penny and Stevens wrestling a fruit machine (and losing) has absolutely made my day. Thank you.

Ps did Penny’s side step get him past the fruit machine? (Awaits people to make the obvious remark).

Tommy Conroy was a good fullback.

might also explain that gesture he'd do, run past a player who was tackled waiting for an offload that never came.

That thing he'd do with his hands gesturing.


that transfers to a punter expectant of a downpour of ten pence pieces landing on the floor

Nothing sinister meant here, but is Lee Penny still a bachelor?

I'm just wondering if he's ever made a pass at a woman.
He certainty never made one to a team mate.

Personally, I always thought Penny was a great full back.

Lee Penny was made a bit of a scapegoat by Cullen.
I felt Penny was poorly treated and poorly rewarded by the club in his testimonial season and yet Danny Farrah was carried around the ground like some legendary alll time great.

Lee Penny was popular because he played for the club for a while and he gave good honest effort.

But if we're honest, he would never have been good enough for a top side. He didn't offer enough. He was solid and safe, robust tackler and reliable under the high ball. Not a player that opposition teams could target as a weakness. That should be just a bare minimum for a fullback. He didn't have any kind of agility, never passed, his pace was OK but nothing special. He rarely beat a man. I remember one year DVDV started putting Allan Hunte there, and we looked much more dangerous because although Huntey had a few flaws he was much more dynamic and I thought this is how we need to move forwards. After Hunte it was Appo (before he moved to stand-off to replace an injured Briers), who was similarly more dangerous. You could see the writing on the wall because Penny was becoming obsolete as the game moved on.

The other issue with Penny was he never seemed to get any better than when he first emerged. He came out in a good class of players around the time Harris, Scully, Hilton and Roper came through so it felt like the future was bright, and a young Penny ran in a lot of tries. But as his career went on he was just....Penny. You knew what you got. Contrast say to Jon Clarke who I thought early on was a similar level of steady-unspectacular player, but as his career went on he became a better player, in more than one position, and Clarke reached a time when he was probably a top 10% player in the league.

I get why people like LP but for me he was the definition of average, and one thing that rankles about being a Wire fan is that we have preferred to dwell in the realm of average than shoot higher.

To take lefty's critique: "we're too nice". How many years do you think Penny would have lasted at Wigan, Saints, Leeds? Would their fans have regarded him as fondly as ours?