Johnston's Kangaroo selection the launching pad to greatness

And yet, jersey, we have posters on here who call the English comp then "second rate" and far inferior to the Sydney comp! The ignorance of the history of international rugby league - even from confirmed fans of the game - on the Roar is staggering. Thank you for helping set the record straight.

A very interesting discussion. May I make a few points:- [1] When Brian Bevan played most of his football late 40's and 50's British Rugby League was generally superior that of Australia - the Test results suggest it [2] Bevan's record is statistically superior to Irvine's [3] A review of of newspapers shows that Harold Horder, was just as highly thought of by his contemporaries as was Ken Irvine. [4] Harry Bath, who played with Bevan and coached Irvine thought Bevan superior [5] Clive Churchill who played with Ian Moir and coached Irvine thought Moir superior [6] Irvine was really quick but was beaten by Ian Moir and again later by Mike Cleary. {7] Ken McCaffery, rated Billy Boston superior to Irvine As I say an interesting discussion

Well Turnitup while I agree with some of your comments. As far as your comment "catching the high ball" and the "grubbers" are concerned you are dead set WRONG. Aj is fantastic at both, he played Fullback against the Sharks in that Cyclone and dropped ZERO balls that night, and against Canberra, ZERO errors also. Oh by the way that try he scored last year against the Tigers, from DUMMY HALF, 70 meters out, when he cut through the middle beating 4 defenders and left James Tedesco clutching at thin air, well that was a great effort! His try on debut last season when he leapt high over his opposite and still managed to get the ball down millimeters inside the Touch in-goal line was spectacular also.

You mentioned St George as part of your contention that the "Sydney comp" was far superior to the English one - even though you have proffered precisely zero evidence to support such a claim. The so-called "second rate" English competition kept producing enough players and teams to create a national side that was - during the era we are talking about - dominant over Australia. Credit where credit is due! Once again, the St George v Lions game is an example used to illustrate how the greatest club side of all time were destroyed by the Ashes-winning 1962 Lions. They'd won the Ashes on their previous tour of 1958 too. And reclaimed it - for the last time - in 1970. It is post-1970 that has seen the decline of English rugby league. Brian Bevan, however, played in the English game's Golden Era...

How many players have played for Australia in the last 12 months - way too many Chambers in the centre - good God - is this the one player designed to make the game even but Johnson will be a target on the other - where are the experienced players... Hell why are there no Illawarra Hawks players selected...

The Kangaroos didn't win an Ashes Test series in England for over 50 years. That is a simple statement of fact. The Lions defeated Australia away from home on a regular basis. The English had a superior record to Australia both before and during Bevan's sojourn to England. Australia's supremacy has arrived post-1970, when the Lions last won the Ashes. You do realise that Brian Bevan's career was well before the ascendancy of Australia, don't you? He arrived in England in 1946 - not 1976!

nerval, that is a ridiculous example and a comparison, I don't know if St George ever played St Helens, Hull or the top club sides then in the English comp? But I know when the Kangaroos played these club sides in England, they killed them. I saw the English sides play in Australia in the late 50's (as I was a young boy then) but the 60's 70's 80' 90's 2000's 2010's I saw them all and as the years went on the English sides got worst and worst, and that is why the stats are like they are above. Simple as that, you cant tell me that they have a better record then us, come on.

nerval, also if you really want the real stats, then here they are; Since 1946 Australia and Great Britain or England altogether contested in 113 tests of which, 3 were under the Super league banner, there were 3 tests that were drawn, and out of the tally; Australia won 73 tests and Great Britain or England won 37. I don't know where you get this 'the Kangaroos couldn’t win a Test series in England for about 50 years!'? It never ever happened. have a look at the stats on Wikipedia, it’s all there.

In other words, Bevan's try-scoring average per game was far superior to Irvine's - and over a much longer period! Once again, you concede just how good the Poms were and, in the very next breath, conclude that their competition was much weaker than the "Sydney comp" - with nothing whatsoever to back up your claims. How do you conclude that their competition was inferior to the "Sydney comp" even though their national side was superior to Australia? As for the great St George - I'm a Dragons fan. I love the club. I want the club to return to being St George and not St George-Illawarra... but here's a link to the famous occasion when the Saints - half way through their record run - challenged the touring 1962 Lions to an unofficial Test match. As you can see they were absolutely humiliated before nearly 60,000 paying spectators at the Sydney Cricket Ground. Credit where credit is due, steveng! http://www.eraofthebiff.com/memorable-matches-from-the-biff-era/m04-_st_george_dragons_thrashed_by_the_touring_poms

nerval, in those days the poms had allot of good rugby players playing RL and that is why they were more than a match for the Aussies and they even dominated there for a few years, the poms did everything and anything in those days to beat the Aussies just like they do in the cricket, and that is a fact right up until this day. But, as you quoted 'Ervine scored 275 tries in 291 games while Bevan scored 757 in 672 games!' In other words Bevan played 381 more games so surely he would have a better record than Ervine, but as I've said before I don't think that Bevan's competition and opposition was as great or as good as what Ervine had to contest with here in the Sydney comp, with the likes of the mighty St George side(s) Gasnier, Raper, Smith and all the other greats and that is week in and year out for his 291 games.

That's how I see it too. When put in the clear, he looks good. But even then, he is merely quick and not a sprinter. Physically, he looks slight and plays as he looks. Is he a natural stepper? Not to me he isn't. I'm pleased for Johnston. I want him to do well. But Johnston as the heir to Ken Irvine? No.

I'm afraid steveng that you betray your ignorance when writing that the English competition was "a much weaker competition..." Do you have anything - anything at all - to support such a risible notion? This is then contradicted by your swift admission that "England were more than a match for the Aussies..." And in what way, shape or form was the competition "second rate?" Bevan played in the Golden Age of English rugby league before huge crowds and great acclaim. There was a period when the Kangaroos couldn't win a Test series in England for about 50 years! The Lions beat Australia away from home in Ashes series after Ashes series! As for your comment about "how" the tries were scored, well, you're on the wrong track there my friend. Bevan is renowned for scoring the most impossible individual tries anyone had ever seen. Playing among legendary wingers such as the great "Bouncing" Billy Boston - who terrorised the Aussies - Springbok Tom Van Vollenhoven and most-capped international wing, Mick Sullivan - Bevan shone the brightest of all.

A lot of people commenting on your article can't seem to understand what you have written, I hope it is a launching pad to greatness but we shall see what we shall see.

Lets not talk him up too much please, that will only increase his value and I don't want to lose him !!

Spot on re Irvine. I've only been following RL for 50 years, but he was definitely up there with Gasnier, Raper and Langlands in the 60s. He should have been an "Immortal", and still could be made one. I think he fell out with the 67 Kangaroo tour leadership and never played for Australia again. He allegedly led a "walk off" in a first grade game in late 60s or early 70s. The "system" wiped him. There is a story somewhere in why he was ostracized! Want to write it?

I think you are dreaming David,sure he is quick but at the moment he is just a winger with speed & most of his tries are just like the player he replaced Nathan Merritt, catch & put down from inside the twenty with the overlap.As for fullback he has a lot of work to do with defence,catching the high ball as well as the grubbers.Lets see how he is going in three years time as far as your rating goes.

He has made some spectacular try saves, Inglis that is. The one on Uate springs to mind. He has a lot more size than Alex so he can utilise that when defending

I don't know if you watch rabbits every game but i reckon you would find in those situations more often than not inglis does not make that tackle.

When AJ first started out i thought he was a carbon copy of nathan merrit, brilliant finisher with blinding pace. not much else. his try scoring record is impressive but after only a season and a bit playing outside the best team in the league i think its a bit earlier to be considering him in the same league as ken irvine. i can see him being a great club winger not so much a great test fullback like many people are claiming(not so much this article). probably deserves a run with the morris boys out and no other stand out wingers but with both of them fit he doesnt get anywhere near the best team. in saying that good luck to him he will probably get a hat-trick on the weekend

And David's non selection of the great Billy Smith as 1/2 also 'defies description'. So you could go on and on with the best sides in RL, everybody has their own 'greats' and never the twain shall meet.