The argument that Johnathan Thurston is the NRL’s so-called “best player” is a common one in certain circles of the Australian rugby league community.
Just recently, Immortal Bob Fulton claimed that Thurston was the equal of another Immortal, Halfback of the Century and Channel Nine personality Andrew Johns. Last year, Andrew’s own brother Matthew, one of the game’s sharpest minds, voiced much the same sentiment, declaring that Thurston would surpass Johns as the game’s best ever halfback within two years.
These are intriguing arguments. They’re also possibly misleading – and not because Thurston is over-rated. True, in terms of natural talent, all-round football skill and ‘completeness’ as a player, it is hard to argue that anyone in the NRL is better than Thurston.
But it is still misleading for two reasons: first, being the ‘best’ doesn’t necessarily make you the ‘most valuable’, and second, there is a clear and quite persuasive argument that Melbourne’s Cooper Cronk actually holds this title of being ‘the most valuable’ – despite not necessarily being ‘the best’.
Bear with me here.
Statistics are useful, but often they obscure more than they reveal. They might tell you who the most dominant players are quantitatively. But you have to go looking for who consistently influences his team’s fortunes in the biggest games, in the crucial moments, over the course of entire seasons. With this in mind, I raise the following:
For four years straight, Cronk has actually outpointed Johnathan Thurston in Dally M voting. What makes this even more remarkable is the fact that Cronk had the ever-present Australian captain Cameron Smith and Kangaroos fullback Billy Slater taking Dally M points from him.
In 2006, his first year starting at halfback for the Storm, Cronk was awarded Dally M Halfback of the Year – an award he won a further three times in 2011, 2012 and 2013. In fact, in 2006, Cronk actually outpointed Andrew Johns for this award.
Cronk’s been to a grand final five times. In 2012, he not only won a premiership legitimately – after all the immense controversy over Melbourne allegedly fielding an ‘illegal’ side in their previous two appearances – but also won the Clive Churchill medal for best on ground. Many good judges maintain he almost single-handedly destroyed the Canterbury Bulldogs on the biggest day of the year.
One of the ‘illegal’ grand finals in 2009 saw Cronk almost single-handedly destroyed Parramatta, with most reasonable judges deeming him incredibly unlucky not to have won best on ground for that game. Interestingly, the eventual Clive Churchill Medalwinner, Billy Slater, actually agreed: the award should have gone to Cronk.
In State of Origin, he’s had only two opportunities at starting halfback over the course of an entire series. In the deciding games of both, he put on the play that won the deciding game – the field goal in 2012 and the try assist to Hodges in 2013.
In 2013, he then won the Dally M medal outright, narrowly edging Thurston and a few others.
Cronk starred in the game before last against the Titans, Cronk had three try assists and one linebreaks – in a losing team.
Last weekend against the Dragons, he was man of the match in a victory that was only secured after the siren had sounded, handling twice in the set that produced the game-winning try.
These are interesting numbers. Equally as interesting though, is a certain school of thought on Cronk compared to Thurston: Thurston is possibly a superior footballer skill-wise with much greater instinct and flair. He’s also much more unpredictable, which makes him such a nightmare for defensive coaches.
However, he also needs certain types of players around him to fully shine: ones who have excellent ‘football brains’ and are calm, can perform at big moments and in big games, and who can lead a team – thus freeing up JT to play his own game and be free of pressure. Think Darren Lockyer, Cameron Smith and, well, Cooper Cronk.
This is what we mean by someone being ‘the most valuable’ but not necessarily ‘the best’.
While Thurston is more a natural footballer, it can be argued quite persuasively that Cronk has had to do more with less natural talent simply to reach the same heights.
If Thurston is Roger Federer, then perhaps Cronk is Rafael Nadal. If Thurston is Magic Johnson, then perhaps Cronk is John Stockton.
Metaphors aside, Cronk has had to achieve more in less time, having waited a number of years behind Darren Lockyer to get starts representatively.
So why no love for Cronk? What more can he really do to get the wraps he seems to deserve? What are we missing here?
Tank
Guest
This may be me coming from a non rugby league state, but, why are there so few immortals compared to say legends in the AFL hall of fame? Most sports update their hall of fame annually but league doesn't seem to have done so since its centenary celebrations. Surely if you expanded the league hall of fame to say 150-200 and made 10% legends or immortals if you prefer then there is room for all of these players you talk about to eventually assume this status, particularly if, like other sports you add 5 or 6 players each year and a legend every time a further ten are in there. You could also elevate players from queensland state comps etc before the NRl came into existence. It seems strange that this does not happen.
Jackson Henry
Guest
I'm in furious agreement, obviously. The reason why I give him wraps is because he's squeezed every ounce out of his potential through hard work, determination and commitment. My criticism (if you can call it that) of guys like JT, GI and Hayne is that there's a significant gap between what they're capable of and what they produce - in terms of frequency at the very least. For Cooper, he's just the most prepared, most thorough, most well-schooled - and therefore intelligent - player in the game, in my opinion. This is why we've seen what we've seen from him in terms of accolades. I just don't get why no-one talks about him being a future Immortal. Partiuclarly when his numbers (both individually and team-wise) are actually better than all of the other so-called future Immortals - like JT, Inglis, Slater and so forth.
Shak
Guest
Spot on article. I have been preaching this for years. I think there are a couple of superstars who are better players than Cooper Cronk, namely Thursto and GI, however, in terms of "Most Valuable", undoubtedly Cronk is the most valuable man in Rugby League. As the article stated, when it comes down to the big moments in the big games, he is the one who gets whichever team, representative or club, over the line time and time again.
langerthebronco
Guest
Cronk outstanding, like against Bulldogs when Cam Smith was watching from the side lines or against manly in 07 grand final when Smith again watching from the sides..
therugbyfan
Guest
I stand corrected on Inglis. It might be me but how does SBW recieve a point after the eels match?
therugbyfan
Guest
yeah I agree with you on that
The Barry
Roar Guru
rugby fan - Inglis was outstanding at the start of last year but from about round 10 was playing origin, out injured, playing injured and just not performing. I think he had about 6 weeks off. He might have played the best game but he was far from the best player last year.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Smith has been ordinary ths year and Cronk outstanding.
ctar
Guest
Exactly. Smith is considered the greatest number 9 to ever play, Slater would be in the top 3 all time fullbacks. Makes Cronk's job a lot easier IMO.
Jackson Henry
Guest
This is a bit out there, and I'm hijacking my own thread here, but I wonder if they should expand the voting criteria: like go 5,4,3,2,1 rather than just 3,2,1. While it risks being more complicated (and more work) for the judges, it would give you a much - MUCH - greater indication of performance. Plus, it would really reward the more consistent players. So if you're perceived to be the fourth best performer in the last 4 games (and the top 3 performers in these games are different week-to-week) you still get 8 points...rather than zero like you would now. I'm thinking forwards would be much better rewarded in this sort of system. To me, the top 5 out of 34 players on ground in any given game is wide enough to reward good players but still narrow enough to make the award relevant. And, it gives more room for players on losing sides to still feature in the voting. A further alternative would be this: give the winning team 5,4,3 and the losing side 3,2,1. This way you're really rewarded for standing out in a winning team, but still rewarded for playing well in a losing team. Anyway.
therugbyfan
Guest
the dally M is a joke, the whole awards is joke. i.e SBW recieved 1 pt after their lost against the Eels. How Inglis didn't make the top 7 last year beats me, thought he should've won the whole thing. Maybe they just need to replace the current voters.
Jackson Henry
Guest
Yeah, I'm glad others have picked that up. I don't really like relying on Dally M awards as evidence of a player's worth, as I think they're flawed beyond measure, but in this case, the awards have reinforced what I've seen with my eyes for a few years now. Ask Cameron Smith himself as to who really runs the Storm..it isn't him!
FrozenNorth
Guest
Hands down, Cronk is brilliant week to week.
Bj
Guest
'Allegedly' . Yeah they cheated. There is no 'allegedly'.
Muzz
Guest
It's our differences that make life interesting. Good on him for being his own man and true to himself.
Jackson Henry
Guest
That's actually what I find equally as interesting - he's so different to the Rugby League stereotype. Doesn't have the haircuts and the tatts, doesn't have the accent, seems to be highly intelligent, quotes poetry on his own website, the list goes on. I just like the individualist in him I suppose.
Fil
Guest
Get your point about thurston but what about DCE? I thought he had a much more impressive year than Cronk and yet right when Manly were charging to the finals and DCE was playing his best footy, Cronk seemed to poll a whole bunch of three votes at the back end of the season. Personally I thought paul gallen was a standout player last year. Shame it didn't go to a forward. I just didn't think cronk had a season that stood out as no. 1 player like barba the year before. I don't have an agenda against the storm. I just don't feel that they bring anything positive to the game. Every coach has now been forced to hire wrestling coaches because of them, they slow down the ruck and in general are a team that, when refereed legally, rarely win. I remember the entertaining sides like saints, canterbury and parramatta of the 80's, tigers 05 and the way the warrriors like to play
Muzz
Guest
Great article by the way and you got me thinking now.I have always rated Coops but last year i had him behind DCE.I think it was just my taste as i prefer a creative 7 more than structured one but as mentioned above , Coops is surprisingly ripping it up with the change in the games dynamic that lends itself to ad-lib footy.I also think he i standing out a little more as Smith and Slater look a little out of form.I hope this doesn't offend but i have always thought he has a Tom Cruise Scientology type aura about him : ) Not that theres anything wrong with that !
Scrubbit
Guest
That's not what I was saying I'm just pointing out that smith provides far better service than the cowboys hooker of the week. They've really struggled without a true hooker last year and it looks like the same is happening this year. The forwards set a good platform but when people in the back line are literally tripping over themselves (winterstein) and not connecting with the set plays final passes (Tate) it makes it hard for the halves. Cowboys should be right up there but it seems as if something is simply off. Whether it be the lack of a good 1,7, and 9 (although coote is injured and I'm guessing they were planning a lot of offence through him) or that they are simply a team of underachievers with a bad culture, all I know is JT while having an off night vs tigers has been the only bright light.
Jackson Henry
Guest
Haha, that's well-spotted! No, the article has been in the pipeline for a while, the debate was driven by things that were already in development from my side. For ages I've been talking about Cronk to anyone who would pretend to listen to me (my thanks to them both) about how he really is the game's MVP - not Thurston. I suppose it is this: people talk about Cam Smith being a future Immortal. People talk about JT being a future Immortal. People (strangely in my opinion) talk about Bill Slater being a future Immortal. All respectable arguments. But no-one talks about Cronk being a future Immortal...and his numbers are actually better than the lot of them. I mean, is it the linited opportunities at Origin thing? Is is the Kangaroos thing? Or is it the fact that he's a bit eccentric or something? It truly is an X-File for me. What's doing.