Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

All the news on the Canberra Raiders NRL team, all in one place

Moderator: GH Moderators

Green Beers
Gerry De La Cruz
Posts: 16
Joined: April 8, 2017, 9:48 pm
Favourite Player: Ricky staurt

Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Green Beers »

Hell yes.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 130755
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by greeneyed »

Wonderful player, but I don't think he will be. They love to include playmakers... There'll be a number of them in front of him... Lockyer, Thurston and Smith are probably in line... and his time will have passed by the time they're done with that.
Image

User avatar
-PJ-
Laurie Daley
Posts: 19049
Joined: May 8, 2010, 1:58 pm
Favourite Player: Josh Papalii
Location: 416.9 km from GIO Stadium

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by -PJ- »

The best lock forward on this earth..
3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment..Old Faithful
#emptythetank :shock:

User avatar
edwahu
Laurie Daley
Posts: 19602
Joined: January 13, 2005, 5:22 pm

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by edwahu »

I think you need more longevity. He and Stuart would both be straight in otherwise.

Wiki Special
Alan Tongue
Posts: 667
Joined: August 11, 2016, 8:16 am
Favourite Player: Josh Hodgson

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Wiki Special »

No, as great as he was (and he was great) he is just shy. Like a Fittler is just shy. I do fear that they are getting a bit too free with adding to the Immortals going forward. Slater, Cronk, Thurston, Smith, Lockyer and Inglis are going to go close - it wouldn't shock me if 5 of them did. However, I would only add Smith.

*Back to Clyde and his greatness, I remember around '93 'Rugby League Week' released an edition listing their Greatest 100 players. I believe Clyde was #13 on their list.
Last edited by Wiki Special on May 2, 2020, 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27106
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Botman »

I love Clyde, he was a tremendously good footballer and his motor and skill was IMO unmatched by any modern day lock forward before or since.

But as for immortal status? Even in Canberra ranks i couldnt put him up before Stuart, Daley and Walters got their tick of approval.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 130755
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by greeneyed »

I definitely wouldn't add Lockyer myself.
Image

Hong Kong Raider
Simon Woolford
Posts: 414
Joined: August 28, 2016, 6:19 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Hong Kong Raider »

Watching the 89, 91 and 94 Grand Finals again (and the 1994 semi final against Canterbury), I think he's a super player, not an Immortal though. Best lock of his generation - better than Price, Bob Lindner or Wayne Pearce. Even better than Fittler. One of my favourite Raiders players. I remember Rugby League Week giving Clyde a 10 out of 10 rating - impossible during the 80s and 90s. Peter Sterling was another player that got a 10 rating once.

Regarding the suggestions of Immortal status of others - I don't rate Lockyer or Inglis that high.

User avatar
afgtnk
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6942
Joined: April 7, 2007, 1:45 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by afgtnk »

No. I think people throw out the 'make him an immortal' line out far too readily - it should only be reserved for the very best of the best, instead of being handed out like candy canes.

Guys like Clyde, Lockyer, Thurston, Slater... greats of the game, but not quite good enough IMO. I've even seen guys like Cooper Cronk thrown out there ****. IMO only Smith deserves to make it out of players that have played in the past 10 years.

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27106
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Botman »

I think you're underselling JT a little bit there... He's a step above the 3 named there imo. I think he's the best half i've seen play the game. He's a very good shout for immortal status, but i do agree that this should be reserved for the HIGHEST standards possible.

Smith is absolute gimmie, he's the best footballer i've ever seen.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 130755
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by greeneyed »

Smith and Thurston would be my two. Darren Lockyer captained Australia to a World Cup defeat!
Image

User avatar
edwahu
Laurie Daley
Posts: 19602
Joined: January 13, 2005, 5:22 pm

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by edwahu »

The funny thing about the immortals is when it was first awarded it was the best players over 35 years voted for by a coach who had close ties to the Dragons, a reporter and commentator for a newspaper promotion. So I don't know if the bar was really that high.

To me max 1 or 2 players a decade should get it, and as it is it's still over represented with players from the 60's and 70's. For me Smith and Thurston would be next with Lockyer just missing out.

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27106
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Botman »

I think that's the right mentality about it... you should be adding the best 1-2... maybe 3 players every 10 years or so.

That's the standard, or at least it should be.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;

User avatar
papabear
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6257
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by papabear »

depends on how many they let in.

User avatar
Roger Kenworthy
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8466
Joined: January 7, 2005, 10:18 pm
Favourite Player: Ruben Wiki, J-Lo, Jordan Rapana

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Roger Kenworthy »

I'd have Slater ahead of JT. JT is about the best rep player I have ever seen, but he underachieved at club level. Right smack in the middle of his prime between 08 and 10 his Cowboys went 17-40 with him on the park. It's not as if he had particularly weak rosters. Stuart and Langer both have arguments that they were better NRL halves than JT.

User avatar
afgtnk
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6942
Joined: April 7, 2007, 1:45 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by afgtnk »

Botman wrote:
May 4, 2020, 8:25 pm
I think you're underselling JT a little bit there... He's a step above the 3 named there imo. I think he's the best half i've seen play the game. He's a very good shout for immortal status, but i do agree that this should be reserved for the HIGHEST standards possible.

Smith is absolute gimmie, he's the best footballer i've ever seen.
Yeah agree with Rog above. Personally don't rate Thurston as high as others are, especially post retirement. The same way that some feel Johns is a benefactor of the Channel 9 hype machine, I feel that with Thurston. Just don't feel that he dominated club level well enough or long enough, a tag that came and went throughout his career, and although not by his own design, he did play alongside a glut of out and out stars in rep football that probably made anyone better than they are. I think one has to then revert to club career as the main marker for Immortal status given that.

I have him on the Sticky and Langer level give or take, which is a couple of notches below Smith and Johns IMO.

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 30928
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by dubby »

Hall of fame?

Yes?

Immortal?

No.

But he's always among the first players i would pick. Probably THE first.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Image

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27106
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Botman »

afgtnk wrote:
May 5, 2020, 5:02 pm
Botman wrote:
May 4, 2020, 8:25 pm
I think you're underselling JT a little bit there... He's a step above the 3 named there imo. I think he's the best half i've seen play the game. He's a very good shout for immortal status, but i do agree that this should be reserved for the HIGHEST standards possible.

Smith is absolute gimmie, he's the best footballer i've ever seen.
Yeah agree with Rog above. Personally don't rate Thurston as high as others are, especially post retirement. The same way that some feel Johns is a benefactor of the Channel 9 hype machine, I feel that with Thurston. Just don't feel that he dominated club level well enough or long enough, a tag that came and went throughout his career, and although not by his own design, he did play alongside a glut of out and out stars in rep football that probably made anyone better than they are. I think one has to then revert to club career as the main marker for Immortal status given that.

I have him on the Sticky and Langer level give or take, which is a couple of notches below Smith and Johns IMO.
I think the comments about his play at club level are fair and valid, he didnt always step up there, he also got **** about 3 years in a row in finals footy so that's to be considered haha, but i also dont think that Cowboys team was ever THAT stacked and the dragging that team out of the duldrums, and kicking and screaming to a premiership was the eqivilant to me of raising the titanic. He might have single handedly saved that franchise.

His rep performances were out of this world. In a stacked QLD team, he was THE guy. That's pretty incredible.
But yeah horses for courses i guess.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27106
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Botman »

Roger Kenworthy wrote:
May 5, 2020, 2:20 pm
I'd have Slater ahead of JT. JT is about the best rep player I have ever seen, but he underachieved at club level. Right smack in the middle of his prime between 08 and 10 his Cowboys went 17-40 with him on the park. It's not as if he had particularly weak rosters. Stuart and Langer both have arguments that they were better NRL halves than JT.
The Slater debate for me is tough. I think he's phenominal but i also cant shake that today's game is set up for fullbacks to be superstars in modern times.
There has been so many incredibly great fullbacks in the last 10-15 years, and granted he's the best of them, but i dont think he is as far above his peers as others. Like is Slater at his absolute peak better than Tedesco or RTS? Yes, but not by the margin that Thurston was over his peers.

It's a fun debate to have
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;

User avatar
afgtnk
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6942
Joined: April 7, 2007, 1:45 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by afgtnk »

Botman wrote:
May 5, 2020, 7:27 pm
afgtnk wrote:
May 5, 2020, 5:02 pm
Botman wrote:
May 4, 2020, 8:25 pm
I think you're underselling JT a little bit there... He's a step above the 3 named there imo. I think he's the best half i've seen play the game. He's a very good shout for immortal status, but i do agree that this should be reserved for the HIGHEST standards possible.

Smith is absolute gimmie, he's the best footballer i've ever seen.
Yeah agree with Rog above. Personally don't rate Thurston as high as others are, especially post retirement. The same way that some feel Johns is a benefactor of the Channel 9 hype machine, I feel that with Thurston. Just don't feel that he dominated club level well enough or long enough, a tag that came and went throughout his career, and although not by his own design, he did play alongside a glut of out and out stars in rep football that probably made anyone better than they are. I think one has to then revert to club career as the main marker for Immortal status given that.

I have him on the Sticky and Langer level give or take, which is a couple of notches below Smith and Johns IMO.
I think the comments about his play at club level are fair and valid, he didnt always step up there, he also got **** about 3 years in a row in finals footy so that's to be considered haha, but i also dont think that Cowboys team was ever THAT stacked and the dragging that team out of the duldrums, and kicking and screaming to a premiership was the eqivilant to me of raising the titanic. He might have single handedly saved that franchise.

His rep performances were out of this world. In a stacked QLD team, he was THE guy. That's pretty incredible.
But yeah horses for courses i guess.
It's fair to say that the Cowboys did get screwed in the finals for a few years there.

However, I think that 2017 in particular counts against him when despite being out for the second half of the season they still made the GF.

I mean, how many teams could realistically make it that far without their star player and halfback, who's that good people are claiming him to be a future immortal? Would the Storm make it without Smith, or the Knights with Johns? Little to no chance IMO. We ourselves fell to **** when Stick went out in '93, which is something considered to be a point of proof as to how good he really was - and a reason why I've got my doubts over Thurston's immortal claims.

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27106
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Botman »

Yeah that's a pretty fair rebuttal. Very hard to argue agianst that. 2017 season lingers in the air like a bad smell over his claims as an immortal
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;

User avatar
edwahu
Laurie Daley
Posts: 19602
Joined: January 13, 2005, 5:22 pm

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by edwahu »

I don't really count it against given everything else he did, they were pretty trash all year and then had an arsey run for 3 games. If Saints didn't choke last round they wouldn't have even have made the 8.

User avatar
Sid
Steve Walters
Posts: 7434
Joined: May 15, 2015, 8:47 pm
Favourite Player: Shannon Boyd
Location: Darwin, N.T.

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Sid »

afgtnk wrote:
Botman wrote:
May 5, 2020, 7:27 pm
afgtnk wrote:
May 5, 2020, 5:02 pm
Botman wrote:
May 4, 2020, 8:25 pm
I think you're underselling JT a little bit there... He's a step above the 3 named there imo. I think he's the best half i've seen play the game. He's a very good shout for immortal status, but i do agree that this should be reserved for the HIGHEST standards possible.

Smith is absolute gimmie, he's the best footballer i've ever seen.
Yeah agree with Rog above. Personally don't rate Thurston as high as others are, especially post retirement. The same way that some feel Johns is a benefactor of the Channel 9 hype machine, I feel that with Thurston. Just don't feel that he dominated club level well enough or long enough, a tag that came and went throughout his career, and although not by his own design, he did play alongside a glut of out and out stars in rep football that probably made anyone better than they are. I think one has to then revert to club career as the main marker for Immortal status given that.

I have him on the Sticky and Langer level give or take, which is a couple of notches below Smith and Johns IMO.
I think the comments about his play at club level are fair and valid, he didnt always step up there, he also got **** about 3 years in a row in finals footy so that's to be considered haha, but i also dont think that Cowboys team was ever THAT stacked and the dragging that team out of the duldrums, and kicking and screaming to a premiership was the eqivilant to me of raising the titanic. He might have single handedly saved that franchise.

His rep performances were out of this world. In a stacked QLD team, he was THE guy. That's pretty incredible.
But yeah horses for courses i guess.
It's fair to say that the Cowboys did get screwed in the finals for a few years there.

However, I think that 2017 in particular counts against him when despite being out for the second half of the season they still made the GF.

I mean, how many teams could realistically make it that far without their star player and halfback, who's that good people are claiming him to be a future immortal? Would the Storm make it without Smith, or the Knights with Johns? Little to no chance IMO. We ourselves fell to **** when Stick went out in '93, which is something considered to be a point of proof as to how good he really was - and a reason why I've got my doubts over Thurston's immortal claims.
In 2016 Slater was ruled out in March for 8 months. Storm then went on to become minor premiers and make it to the last play of the grand final that year so could kind of make the same argument against Slater too

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Would have won Boogs - 2016, 2017, 2018

1 part green, 1 part machine

User avatar
afgtnk
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6942
Joined: April 7, 2007, 1:45 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by afgtnk »

Sid wrote:
May 5, 2020, 10:43 pm
afgtnk wrote:
Botman wrote:
May 5, 2020, 7:27 pm
afgtnk wrote:
May 5, 2020, 5:02 pm
Botman wrote:
May 4, 2020, 8:25 pm
I think you're underselling JT a little bit there... He's a step above the 3 named there imo. I think he's the best half i've seen play the game. He's a very good shout for immortal status, but i do agree that this should be reserved for the HIGHEST standards possible.

Smith is absolute gimmie, he's the best footballer i've ever seen.
Yeah agree with Rog above. Personally don't rate Thurston as high as others are, especially post retirement. The same way that some feel Johns is a benefactor of the Channel 9 hype machine, I feel that with Thurston. Just don't feel that he dominated club level well enough or long enough, a tag that came and went throughout his career, and although not by his own design, he did play alongside a glut of out and out stars in rep football that probably made anyone better than they are. I think one has to then revert to club career as the main marker for Immortal status given that.

I have him on the Sticky and Langer level give or take, which is a couple of notches below Smith and Johns IMO.
I think the comments about his play at club level are fair and valid, he didnt always step up there, he also got **** about 3 years in a row in finals footy so that's to be considered haha, but i also dont think that Cowboys team was ever THAT stacked and the dragging that team out of the duldrums, and kicking and screaming to a premiership was the eqivilant to me of raising the titanic. He might have single handedly saved that franchise.

His rep performances were out of this world. In a stacked QLD team, he was THE guy. That's pretty incredible.
But yeah horses for courses i guess.
It's fair to say that the Cowboys did get screwed in the finals for a few years there.

However, I think that 2017 in particular counts against him when despite being out for the second half of the season they still made the GF.

I mean, how many teams could realistically make it that far without their star player and halfback, who's that good people are claiming him to be a future immortal? Would the Storm make it without Smith, or the Knights with Johns? Little to no chance IMO. We ourselves fell to **** when Stick went out in '93, which is something considered to be a point of proof as to how good he really was - and a reason why I've got my doubts over Thurston's immortal claims.
In 2016 Slater was ruled out in March for 8 months. Storm then went on to become minor premiers and make it to the last play of the grand final that year so could kind of make the same argument against Slater too

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Different players though, different positions. Different influences on their teams and game. Influence should be judged within the position played, otherwise it's Sticky that should be the immortal ahead of Mal.

Thurston is judged against other halves and that bar is incredibly high with the type of dominance those players had when they played. Slater should be/is judged against other fullbacks and it's hard to argue he isn't in at least the top two of all-time there, three at the worst.

User avatar
Seiffert82
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22847
Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
Favourite Player: Bay56

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Seiffert82 »

Of the current crop over the last decade, Smith is the only lay down misere.

Lewis and Johns are the only halves and as great as they were - particularly at rep level - I could easily argue that I've seen better halves in my time than those two. Slater was great, but Tedesco has been equally as good at fullback IMO.

Funnily enough, of the 11 immortals, 3 are centres (Meninga, Gasnier and Brown) and another played there for much of his career (Fulton). To that extent, I reckon the one bloke who could have made it to that level if he wasn't so lazy for much of his career was Greg Inglis. This despite centre arguably being the least prominent position in league these days.

Inglis was unstoppable when he was fit and motivated. Often he wasn't one or the other, so he never reached the heights he could have over his entire career. He also suffered from being in the same team as Slater and being relegated to playing centre in a system that didn't fully utilise his ability.

Ilanraiders
Brett Mullins
Posts: 1533
Joined: November 1, 2012, 3:54 am
Favourite Player: Rubenrunlikeatrainandhitlikeatruckwiki!

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Ilanraiders »

How is taumalolo in front of Clyde in the best lock forward over the last 30 years!!
Clyde won 3 Grand Finals, can play 80 mins n to me he revolutionised the way lick forward plays the game!!
Come on peeps get on n vote for Clyde!!
"Learn to appreciate what you have, before time makes you appreciate what you had"!! RAIDERSTILLIDIE!!

User avatar
Roger Kenworthy
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8466
Joined: January 7, 2005, 10:18 pm
Favourite Player: Ruben Wiki, J-Lo, Jordan Rapana

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Roger Kenworthy »

Seiffert82 wrote:
May 5, 2020, 11:49 pm
Of the current crop over the last decade, Smith is the only lay down misere.

Lewis and Johns are the only halves and as great as they were - particularly at rep level - I could easily argue that I've seen better halves in my time than those two. Slater was great, but Tedesco has been equally as good at fullback IMO.

Funnily enough, of the 11 immortals, 3 are centres (Meninga, Gasnier and Brown) and another played there for much of his career (Fulton). To that extent, I reckon the one bloke who could have made it to that level if he wasn't so lazy for much of his career was Greg Inglis. This despite centre arguably being the least prominent position in league these days.

Inglis was unstoppable when he was fit and motivated. Often he wasn't one or the other, so he never reached the heights he could have over his entire career. He also suffered from being in the same team as Slater and being relegated to playing centre in a system that didn't fully utilise his ability.
Peak for peak you could argue Slater vs Tedesco, but Slater was in the top 2 or 3 fullbacks in the game for 15 years. Tedesco has been there for 2 or 3 years.

Inglis could be put in the lazy category for a very small percentage of his career. I think the point you make that he was overshadowed a bit in an all star team has more weight.

User avatar
afgtnk
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6942
Joined: April 7, 2007, 1:45 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by afgtnk »

Tedesco is no where near Slater at the moment, or even someone like Minichiello for that matter. He'd need a good 4-5 more years at this level to get close to Slater.

MrPosh
Peter Jackson
Posts: 216
Joined: June 24, 2016, 5:39 am
Favourite Player: Whitehead

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by MrPosh »

Ilanraiders wrote:
May 8, 2020, 2:40 pm
How is taumalolo in front of Clyde in the best lock forward over the last 30 years!!
Clyde won 3 Grand Finals, can play 80 mins n to me he revolutionised the way lick forward plays the game!!
Come on peeps get on n vote for Clyde!!
Pointless comparison.

Taumalolo isn't a lock in any sense of the word, other than the number on his back. He's simply a prop with a big motor - see Sam Burgess, Jake Trbojevic, etc.

Clyde was terrible over here - one of the very worst Aussies we've ever seen - but he was clearly a great all around player. I don't reckon there's a position on the pitch he wouldn't have made a decent fist of - which I reckon is a great definition of a lock.

Ilanraiders
Brett Mullins
Posts: 1533
Joined: November 1, 2012, 3:54 am
Favourite Player: Rubenrunlikeatrainandhitlikeatruckwiki!

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Ilanraiders »

@Mr Posh

On the NRL website who did u vote for as the best lock over the last 30 years??
"Learn to appreciate what you have, before time makes you appreciate what you had"!! RAIDERSTILLIDIE!!

MrPosh
Peter Jackson
Posts: 216
Joined: June 24, 2016, 5:39 am
Favourite Player: Whitehead

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by MrPosh »

Ilanraiders wrote:
May 9, 2020, 11:12 pm
@Mr Posh

On the NRL website who did u vote for as the best lock over the last 30 years??
I hadn't seen it, but it's still there.

I've also posted previously about the English version of a lock being a skillful but hard forward - such as Mal Reilly or Andy Farrell. Playing as the third pivot, rather than the full back.

I'm probably biased, but it's hard to look beyond Burgess as the best player on the list - but probably for the intangibles like his leadership.

Taumalolo the most destructive, Clyde the best attacking and Mackay the strongest in defence.

In terms of actual locks, as opposed to additional props or second rowers, Clyde is the best there - although I have a huge soft spot for Jim Dymock. He was wonderful for London.

User avatar
Seiffert82
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22847
Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
Favourite Player: Bay56

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Seiffert82 »

MrPosh wrote:
May 9, 2020, 10:16 pm
Ilanraiders wrote:
May 8, 2020, 2:40 pm
How is taumalolo in front of Clyde in the best lock forward over the last 30 years!!
Clyde won 3 Grand Finals, can play 80 mins n to me he revolutionised the way lick forward plays the game!!
Come on peeps get on n vote for Clyde!!
Pointless comparison.

Taumalolo isn't a lock in any sense of the word, other than the number on his back. He's simply a prop with a big motor - see Sam Burgess, Jake Trbojevic, etc.

Clyde was terrible over here - one of the very worst Aussies we've ever seen - but he was clearly a great all around player. I don't reckon there's a position on the pitch he wouldn't have made a decent fist of - which I reckon is a great definition of a lock.
Unfortunately Clyde was busted by the time he got to the UK.

User avatar
BadnMean
David Furner
Posts: 3264
Joined: May 13, 2013, 5:30 pm
Favourite Player: chicka

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by BadnMean »

Clyde was a great player but not even in the top 3 great players in his team*. That's not immortal status.

*Mal, Sticky, Loz- in that order. Clyde, Boxhead, Belcher next.

Agree on the potential to cheapen the immortal tag. Smith probably will be- I hate his guts with a passion and hope he isn't. McKinnon, Croker incidents reveals about all you need to know about the bloke.

Lockyer- no. Same level as Daley or Fittler.

Thurston- worth a nomination. You'd just have to decide if he was the best player or most influential of his era and he may well be.

Slater- got a feeling he will get the nod. He was Mullins level electric at his best and kept it up for far longer at a very, very high standard. So his attacking prowess is not really up for question, his positional play in defence and support was exceptional- it's the standard people measure other FB's by even today. He had a slick passing game. And he was tough enough never to be bashed out of a game (ok, I'm sure someone can mention A game but it was tried every week and he never shirked or disappeared that I saw) despite his size. The fact fans still use him as the "FB gold standard" or get excited if they see snippets of "Slater like" support play or whatever gives the clue he was pretty special.

Cronk- lol. Great competitor, succesful career but not a great, immortal level halfback. You couldn't put him above Sterlo or Ricky or alongside Wally in terms of influence on his teams.

User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27106
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Botman »

afgtnk wrote:
May 9, 2020, 7:22 pm
Tedesco is no where near Slater at the moment, or even someone like Minichiello for that matter. He'd need a good 4-5 more years at this level to get close to Slater.
I think we can all agree Teddy will need the longevity to be considered in the class, but i think what Seiff is saying is Teddy's best games are on par with the best Slater or any other fullback is capable of putting up
And the Tedesco we've seen at the roosters, who has stayed healthy has been absolutely dynamic for them... if, and it's a big if he can maintain that level of play for the next 3-4 years, he'll have had a solid 7 year run of being outrageously good... I dont think he's any chance of being able to overtake slater, but could that put him in the conversation of being in the same ball park? Maybe.

Point is, Slater as incredible as he was... will his play stand the test of the time given how the game is slanted to make fullbacks look like superheros? In 20 years time if we have a slew of players at Tedesco's level or slightly better, even if they arent as good as slater, the disparity between them is smaller than that of say Thurston against his peers, or Mal against his, Smith against his etc.

It may not work out that way, and 20 years from now we're treating Slater with the same reverence as we have for Mal.
Which is why i think you really shouldn't be eligible for the immortals for at least 10 years. Let a a career settle in the dust for a little while, give it a decade to see what's to come after so we can properly judge a player against his period.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;

User avatar
Seiffert82
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22847
Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
Favourite Player: Bay56

Re: Should Bradley Clyde be an Immortal?

Post by Seiffert82 »

Yeah, Slater had the longevity and is in the conversation, but I actually think Tedesco has the ability to single handedly turn an ordinary team into a very good one (Tigers) or a good team into a perennial contender (Roosters). It's hard with Slater - as good as he was I'm just not convinced he transcended the game in the way the likes of Meninga, Lewis, Langlands and Beetson etc did. In that Melbourne team, Cameron Smith defined the way they played and he took that dummy half role to the next level.

Time will tell with Tedesco. I'm still amazed by the way he has rebounded from some incredibly serious injuries.

Slater really defined the modern fullback role though. Definitely up there with Stuart in being the best in the biz at his peak and he did it for a long time.

Post Reply