Who has been rugby's greatest ever player?

In '94 and '95 at the Hong Kong 7's Jonah did things no one else could. And in '95 at the RWC and then for the rest of the year and maybe '96 Jonah was so incredibly spectacular. It really was a case of "get the ball to Jonah". He had to be the most spectacular ever. After that his health issues came up and he never quite reached those peaks again although in '99 at the RWC he was pretty good. And he seemed to save his best for England. But because of his health we will never know how good he could have been. My view was that in '94 and '95 he was the best ever in the way he could dominate a game. No one else has ever done that. But it's team game and Richie was probably the best ever for so many reasons including commitment, longitivity and leadership and Dan not far from him because of his ability to win games for his team. Dan probably loses a point for his injuries over the past few years. Without the ball Jonah could not have done much. Richie got the ball. Dan scored the points. They were all great.

One's credibility comes into question when Bruce McLeod, Ian Kirkpatrick, Graham Mourie and Grant Fox come into the firing line in a discussion about the 100 greatest All Blacks ever. I can only say that I've never called a glass of Coke Zero a Horse, but others I wonder about. I really do :) And I'll save Jerry the trouble of pointing out your factual error. Grant Fox scored at least 1 test try... against the Scots if I remember correctly.

Well I do realize, that a lot of it is,as to what I've seen over the years, along with it being my opinion, on this matter abnutta, but as you know we are all entitled to our opinions, mate. So after a quick comparison between players, this what I've come up with. OK, Anton Oliver & Dennis Young in for both Bruce McLeod & Tane Norton,with no mention of Anton's dad Frank, who should be there in front of Alan Whetton. Kenny Stewart had to be included, as in his time he was classed as a far better flanker than what Mourie ever was. How Ian Kirkpatrick ever got rated that high, has one wondering, as his leadership qualities were shocking, as proven over the Keith Murdoch affair. Aaron Pene possibly should be there, as from memory, wasn't Zinny his bench warmer, prior to 95? Ron Rangi, was possibly one of the most electrifying centre's I've seen along with Graham Thorne & Bruce Robertson, but then again most people know of what happened, when he never played for NZ again. Actually he himself told me about it. Mac Herewini & Frano Botica, deserve a mention, as in my opinion, Grant Fox, possibly the only AB first five, to never score a try in a test match, is so high on their list. OK Fox played the game the AB coach at that time, wanted the game played, which in most cases was 10 man rugby. So in reality, a great quality first five missed out, but not totally, Frano Botica. Well Mate those are some of my opinionated thoughts, lol, Cheers

Huh? NZ had a better for & against too.

It is only your opinion that the players you named were "far better players". In my opinion, only ONE of the players you mention (Dennis Young), would I consider to be on the level of "shock omission" from the 100 that were ranked. The others were Dick Roberts and Ian Jones, but when you have judges of the calibre of Lindsay Knight, Bob Luxford, Bob Howitt and Sir TP McLean on the panel it's very hard to cast aspersions. As a matter of interest, which of the 100 that were ranked would you have omitted in favour of "Dennis Young, Ron Rangi,Mac Herewini, Earl Kirton, Anton Oliver, Kevin Briscoe, Kevin Laidlaw, Frano Botica, Kenny Stewart, Aaron Pene, etc."?

What has me wondering about that particular Book Tribute, abnutta, was the way they left out far better players, in favor of others. In the likes of Dennis Young, Ron Rangi,Mac Herewini, Earl Kirton, Anton Oliver, Kevin Briscoe, Kevin Laidlaw, Frano Botica, Kenny Stewart, Aaron Pene, etc. Along with so many others over the years, that were, I thought, a little better & those that were definitely rated so highly at the expense of others. True, now, at this stage of All Black rugby, hopefully we will get a far better assessment than that, of some that that were rated in Tribute's past effort. One particular assessment, was that, of Des Connor, possibly, the best half back that Australia has produced.

Totally agree with your statements on Ma'a Nonu. He should have been there in 07, as he had already proved that the RWC was his arena, after being accredited as being the player with the most line breaks as a young buck, back in 03. Even then, both Mitchell & Dean's made the stupid decision not to start him in the semi final loss against Australia, instead favoring Leon McDonald from Canterbury. I wasn't that chuffed, at the time.

You're correct Muzzo, in so far as that is the ranking I refer to. I do think it is a fair estimation at the time and what sort of reassessment would reasonably have been expected from the judges, considering only 8 of his 73 matches and 3 of his 43 tries for the All Blacks were after 2001? Same goes for Cullen with 6 out of 60 matches and 4 out of 52 tries. As I pointed out above, Tana Umaga did spring to mind as someone that would have a legitimate claim to be reassessed as 37 of his 74 matches for the All Blacks were post 2001. Furthermore, I think the collective rankings of the judging panel were a little generous towards Lomu as, in my opinion, he would be much further down the list than 23. I think all things considered, somewhere in the late 30's would be about right.

Yep Taylorman, agree totally in regards to Lomu, but another player that has had no mention here was the great Irish centre, Mike Gibson, who actually participated in two Lion's tours of New Zealand.

Check out the for & against Jerry, not the percentages, as that is not a true indication as to who was the top dog. It's between NZ & SA. that is what I'm referring too, not all other nations.

Lindsay, Don Clarke had been known, to kick that old pigskin, in training, from his own goal line, over the sticks, at the far end, barefooted. But that was only in training. There is a write up about his achievement's, Possibly on Google, utube, or somewhere like that, that will verify this. As with today's ball, I would not fathom to even guess to how far he would have kicked it. I can always remember him in the 1959 series against the Lion's, when as a young fella watching from the first test from the railway embankment ( commonly known as the Scotsman's Grandstand, at Carisbrook), when D B kicked all of New Zealand's points from the boot, for us to win 18 - 17.

I assure you abnutta, that I haven't procured a time machine, but if that happens to be the same Tribute copy in which Lomu is ranked 23, Umaga at 39, do you honestly think those are fair assessments, considering those players had not completed their respective playing career's? I myself don't, as we have just seen recently, as to what Ma'a Nonu produced this year, & he is still giving, even though it's not for the AB's. I refer to T P McLean, as although he did have a wonderful knowledge of the AB game, he was also "strangle material", in the eye's of some well known players, due to his confrontational approach.

It definitely wasn't 1998. Hard for NZ to take the lead when they lost both matches v SA.

Up to 1980 - NZ vs everyone - 68%, SA vs everyone 62%. Fact.

Yeh Lindsay, but in truth, the AB's, although we won the 56 series at home, we were still behind the Bokke, in the for & against. That, actually, was surpassed, in the professional era, approx. 1998, I think it was. So really, the Bokke had 60 years at the top of the tree. Well after all, any Kiwi that knows anything about rugby, still consider the Bokke's as the ultimate challenge.

JellyBelly Honestly, mate are your limitations in the knowledge of rugby that small? South Africa, actually were the worlds dominant nation between 1937 to a few years into the professional era of the 1990's. Fact.

Toeava isn't really relevant. He played a different position. Nonu in 2007 had been tried at centre and failed (watch his efforts v Ireland in 06), he was a 12 or nothing at test level. And they weren't gonna take three 12's. And you're once again failing to comprehend that 11/15 Nonu > 07 Nonu. He wasn't anywhere near as consistent, he didn't kick, he was prone to brainf*rt stupid play, his defensive positioning was nowhere near as good etc. From 08 onwards he was much improved - partly cause of a change in attitude, but also from actually being able to play 12 consistently at Super Rugby level due to Umaga leaving. There's a reason he was never a first team selection before 08. McAlister was Man of the Match, I was there and recall seeing it on the big screen. He played a very good game.

All you have to do is ask two questions. One of wingers... Of any winger to have ever played the game who would you prefer not to face in a must win match? And of a captain picking its team like we did in the old schoolyard days, which player in all of time would you select first in the knowledge that you will get their very best game, regardless of whether they play for your team or not. Its my guess in both cases Lomu would get most responses. When its about getting real in this game, thats when you know whos best. Aomeone mentioned Jason Robinson was better than Lomu here. How many would pick him first here?

All I am saying is Nonu should have been in the squad. With something Henry seems to owe Toeava by selecting him both times he went for x factor over familiarity. Nonu has clearly proved the World cup is his arena and had he gone in 2007 he could very well have forced McAlister out. And if McAlister was named man of the match for that performance things were certainly dire indeed. He didnt impress.

Bloody hell forgot all about ''Boy Louw''.I think I need a refresher course and spend some time going back over my dads old rugby books.The players you mentioned above would be certainties in my opinion, except for Louw. That is only because of ignorance. I'm struggling with my team and after your post, it's just got a lot worse.