No he isnt, he is used as a lazy and fatuous argument to denigrate the successes of others. Ricky Bibey earned, deserved, and won his success in the challenge cup. He won it twice, he did that, he should be proud of it. It isnt pointless to praise him for doing so, it is correct to praise him for doing so. He has earnt that praise for his success and he has done it in the only objective way possible.

No it doesnt. It quanitifies success, it is a quantitative judgement. If you want to debate your qualitative opinion of Ali Lauitiiti with some one go ahead. It doesnt alter the success he has earned and the success he has acheived.
schofield didnt earn that success. He doesnt deserve the accolades for successes he didnt acheive. Its a binary question, either you acheived that success or you didnt. Theres no qualification for Schofield to be judged more successful than he was and Lauitiiti less successful than he was on the basis of your own personal opinion, if Schofield had had the comittment, drive and big game temprament of Ali he would likely have been much more successful.

No, that would be a judgement of value for money. I suppose if you wanted you could judge the transfer as 'successful' on the basis of value for money but certainly not the player. But im not sure sport is an area where i would judge economics ahead of trophies when looking at success.

Well yes, that would be a a judgement of success but one you have limited to personal accolades rather than the wider, simpler definition of 'success'.


Wigan fans are constantly banging on about the relative success of their club and their players. They are infamous for it. But you have just clearly described the flaw in your argument. Whilst Edwards has been the most successful player in Wigans history ( a fact he, like Ali, should be proud of. It is, regardless of your attempts to denigrate it, an admirable acheivement) he may not be the best, similarly whilst Ali may be the most successful import of the SL era he may not necessarily be the best

Number of queries with this signing.
Temprement- He's a penalty giving machine.
Endurance- Bitcon can will have to work his magic.
Consistancy- He's either great or biz.
Pronounciation- I can say Lauaki, but his first name from now on will be Ecki-Peki

If you read back Hendy, apparently the penalty machine tag is a myth statistically.

So saying some is successful doesn't really mean much does it? You can be a great player like Edwards and be successful or a great player like Schofield and be unsuccessful or a more limited player like Bibey and be successful or a more limited player like lots of the other Leeds players in Schofield's era and be unsuccessful.

So we can see that describing a player as successful in your terms is simply saying that they have been part of a team or teams that have won trophies. Not something I'd be making a fuss about personally, it's just a bit of a dull, trivial point.

Maybe you play for personal accolades and so people think you are the best. I played to win. I judged my success on whether or not I had won. Ask little Sammy if he would trade his GF win for a MOS award. Ask Garry Schofield if he would trade his Golden Boot for a GF win. Or Harris if his MOS award meant anything whilst he was walking off the pitch in 98, or Farrell what his MOS award meant after Leeds put 40 points on Wigan in a playoff semi-final in 2004. Players play to win, personal accolades and fans views on quality are a ridiculously distant 2nd.

Ali earned the right to be called the most successful import in the SL era. He did that by winning more than any other import in the SL era. He did that. He went out, won those games and became the most successful import in the SL era through his exploits. Well done him, it is a great achievement.

Not sure what my own personal goals have to do with the debate (

), but I don't play to win or for accolades either, for that matter. I was brought up to do my best and without coming over like some oriental cod-philosopher the struggle is with yourself, the goal isn't to defeat others but to make sure you do and are the best that you can be. So there you go!

As for being the most successful player - on your definition it just isn't a great achievement for the individual who has "earned that right". A player who is lucky enough to be in a dominant side will win lots of trophies even if he is a bit of an also-ran in talent terms.

Your use of the word successful seems to be a shorthand for the player with the most trophies in his trophy cabinet - impressive in its way but not really that significant in the great scheme of things.

If I were Garry Schofield I wouldn't swap my career with Ricky Bibey's, league winners medals or no league winners medals.

No Ali was part of the most successful TEAM in the SL era. Fact.

In case you had not noticed rugby is a TEAM sport, being part of a successful TEAM does not make you the most successful individual. God you are stupid.

That was an odd thing to be brought up doing. Doing your best is what losers do, winners win.
A bit of an also ran wouldnt be in a dominant side for that long. Either way it is certainly more of an acheivement than not winning anything (Garry Schofield) or not being paid very much (George Carmont) which are your two examples of success.

If I were Garry Schofield I would. Being a very good player who won nothing sounds pretty much like a failure in my book. But no, success isnt shorthand for winning or achieving your goals, winning and achieving your goals actually defines success. In sport success is winning and your goals are to win trophies/medals/rings etc. If your goals arent to win trophies/medals/rings etc but to benefit yourself, to leave your legacy, so that you are remembered as a good player you end up with.....well.......Garry Schofield, a supremely talented player whose lack of dedication and commitment left him ultimately unsuccessful.

Brett Delany is an import and has been part of the most successful team in the SL era. Yet he hasnt been as successful as Ali Lauitiiti. You know why? Brett Delaney didnt win an SL GF in 2004, 2007, 2008, or 2009. Ali Lauitiiti did. Kylie Lueluia is an import, and he has been part of the most successful team in the SL era, yet he hasnt been as successful as Ali Lauitiiti, you know why? He didnt win a GF in 2004. Ali Lauitiiti did.

In a team sport you make as an individual make an effort towards team success, Ali Lauitiiti, individually contributed to more team success than any other import in the SL era. Ali Lauitiiti experienced more success than any other import. There really are no more ways of saying it, Ali Lauitiiti was more successful than any other import.

To say being part of a successful team doesnt mean you have been successful as an individual is clearly contradictory idiotic nonsense.

Its like saying Sir Steve Redgrave isnt the countries most successful olympian because there were other rowers, or the lead leg of the Jamaican mens 4x100 relay wasnt successful in the 2008 olympic final because Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell were his team-mates.

100% Bang on the money!

TA has proven without doubt who the stupid one is. you would swear black is White if it doesn't fit your agenda.

Ali Lautiti is the most successful import in the SL era but that doesnt make him the [uBEST[/u import in the SL era.

Thats like saying because Leeds won SL last year that Brent Webb is a better full back than Sam Tomkins which he clearly isnt.

No arguments here. In fact, he does it with every post.

Can't have been many better. A few like Lyon and Barrett were outstanding for a couple of years, Lautiti has been one of the most exciting skillful and best overseas players in the comp for the best part of 8 seasons. I know wilko keeps going on about how many GFs he's won but for me you only have to have seen the guy play over the last decade to see how good he is, the winners rings are just the cherry on the cake.

As far as the Luaki signing goes. I'm not really sure what Wane sees in him. Seems a fatter, poorer version of Feka with less ability.

Winners win? What an insightful comment.





You would clearly rather have Bibey's career than Schofield's.





For once, I'm lost for words.

what does ali have to do with wigan signing lauaki? well i hope he is another paul deacon just floating around at an average club then lives up to hes potential with us.

As far as big fat gary hes ruined any respect he gained on the field by talking off it. he should be the one driving a taxi around for a living.

ali was a very good player at the beging i remember him at the jjb holding the ball in hes one hand and looked impossible to stop but over the years he has fade away at leeds i dont really think he has contributed alot over the last 3 seasons and you can add brent webb to that.

The Cub Scout Promise:

I promise that I will do my best
To do my duty to God and to the Queen
To help other people
And to keep the Cub Scout Law.

The Cub Scout Law:

Cub Scouts always do their best
Think of others before themselves
And do a good turn every day.

Perhaps times have changed, but it's hardly an odd thing to be brought up doing....

Correct sir

Wow. That really backs up your point. Nobody would describe you as a loser now you have brought up the cub scout promise on an internet message board.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?



[uYou[/u said it was odd to be brought up to do your best. I've provided evidence that it isn't.

I could have quoted Abraham Lincoln, who is about as serious and important an adult figure as you can get. He famously said:

“I do the very best I know how, the very best I can, and I mean to keep on doing so until the end”

However since you thought it odd to be brought up to do your best it seemed more appropriate to quote a promise which has been and continues to be sworn by millions of children (including me many years ago) in this country and elsewhere.

No i didnt. I said this was an odd way to be brought up
I.e your idea that doing your best was more important than winning, and of course the idea of you being needed early-life education on avoiding coming over like an oriental cod-philospher the hypocrisy of you then going on to give us quotes from the boy scouts and Abraham Lincoln to prove your idea of trying rather than winning being the most important was just the icing on the cake.
If thats how you want to define yourself, feel free. You carry on cheering samikins trying his best and George Carmont not earning very much and Ill carry on cheering Sinfield lifting trophies.

A few more quotes for you my fishy little thinker,
"There is no relief at it being over. There is the joy of winning it." Stefi Graf

"Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will all be judged by only one thing - the result."
Vince Lombardi

If winning isnt so important, why spend all that money on scoreboards?

OK. I wouldn't describe either the views of Abraham Lincoln, widely viewed as one of history's greatest figures a man of great intellect and moral courage, as cod philosophy, nor would I view the cub scout promise as such. But of course you're entitled to your view, even if it is clearly absurd.

You're still also missing the point generally on winning being the goal. It is obvious that winning isn't the only thing that matters or even the most important thing. There are obvious issues around winning at all costs, for example (cheating, drug misuse etc).

There's also the fact that on your definition then all the clubs in SL apart from Leeds, Wigan and Warrington last season were "losers". Which is so ridiculous it's childish.

A team could lose a game through a refereeing error or as a result of injury problems or other things beyond it's control, even if you have the best players, coach and a great worth ethic you can still lose. That's life and it doesn't mean you're a "loser". It's a pretty obvious point (a bit like the Bibey example in relation to trophy wins, which seems also to escape you), but never mind.

As for watching Wigan lift trophies, I don't expect Wigan to win things and be "successful" (though obviously I want Wigan to); we have no divine right to do so. I do expect Wigan to do their absolute best to live up to the values of our great club. If they do, as under IL's leadership we have once again begun to, then we will win trophies and be "successful" in your terms.

Success is a product of doing the right things and you create the conditions for success by a constant pursuit of excellence (doing your very best, all the time, like Lincoln says).

And at the end of the day it is just silly to suggest to a Wigan fan that they don't understand success. Perhaps as a Leeds fan you haven't had enough trophy wins in your lifetime to get a real sense of perspective on this.

It's a bit different being a Wigan fan I guess. Even before the great era of the late 80s and early 90s Wigan had won more trophies than any British RL club. Our trophy cabinet remains the fullest in the game and I have every confidence in IL's leadership delivering more trophies in the years to come...

When even I'm bored of the peeing contest you can safely assume the thread has run it's course.