Cooper Cronk was better than Andrew Johns. There, I said it.
After you wiped up the Blend 43 from your table and chin, let’s have a think.
I’m about to walk you through a simple process of deductive reasoning. In particular I’m going to demonstrate that (a) Andrew Johns was indeed the greatest but that (b) his dominance was incomplete and that (c) it’s within his failings that others have excelled. Therefore, ipso facto, (d) the No. 7 jersey has a brand-new monarch.
Let’s start by agreeing on the obvious – that Johns retired as the best. Certainly on an individual level he’d won it all as a four-time halfback of the year and with five Provan Summons, three Dally Ms, two boots-a-golden and a Churchill.
Though for all his individual success Johns was not perfect. Personal life aside, he was a few pointed toes shy of your Nadia Comaneci.
Case in point, would the greatest No. 7 have lost nearly half his games? And for all his mastery he could manage only one unified premiership. Despite playing with some very rare company, his record for club, state and country was handy at best.
Conversely, Cronk’s record is unsurpassed. He’s won more premierships, more Tests and more Origins at a canter. With an unbelievable win ratio over ten per cent higher than Johns, he’s always managed to pull the team along with him.
But wait – you say it’s because Johns had less support. While you make a valid point, so does an urchin. True, the Knights were headless without him, but Cronk had a similar effect. The Maroons only lost when he broke his arm. And he wasn’t there for the 2008 World Cup disaster. Hell, the Chooks even picked him to carry drinks in last year’s grand final such were their chances without him.
And another thing: would the game’s greatest halfback get shunted out of position, and for no more than a footnote in Geoff Toovey or a walking intercept in Brett Kimmorley? I should think not. The number-one No. 7 would do the exact opposite, like how Cronk dumped Johnathan Thurston from halfback to five-eighth through the peak of his career.
While I could go on, my turmeric latte is being served, so I’ll rest my case. Cooper Cronk is the best, I tell you – he’s the undisputed king of the No. 7s
josh
Roar Rookie
I agree entirely.
stevesyd
Roar Rookie
How much more would have Johns added to his success having played his career alongside Cameron Smith, Billy Slater and Jonathan Thurston? No brainer.
Rob
Guest
Stuart, Langer, Thurston and Cronk’s career accomplishment absolutely dwarf Johns apart from individual point scoring record. There seems to be a lot of weight on being a good individual in a team sport? Joe Johns was the halfback for NSW in 1995. A NSW team with Fitler at 6 and only created 2 tries in the first 2 games? Joe was the DM winner up against a bunch of Queensland kids led by old War horse Trevor Gilmiester. Joe won 54% of his Origin games. NSW were very dominant during Johns era but they were more successful with him coming of the bench, playing hooker or actually not playing at all? Toovey was 71% at 7 during this period?Simons and Kimmorley were equally successful at Origin during that period. His inaugural DM was when half the comp wasn’t playing.
Censored Often
Roar Rookie
Langer, Sterling, Mortimer, Johns, Stuart, Alexander & Cronk (in order). Not popular with the marketing department....
Rob
Guest
So Harragon, Butterfield, Muir, Sargent, Granville, Kennedy, Simpson, Gidley, Tahu, Mcdougal were rubbish? Even Owen Craigie was a solid but nothing above average I guess. Of course M. Johns was a star? Cronk was winning Premships and Minor Premiership repeatably with stars like Proctor, Chambers, Dallas Johnson, Norrie, Hoffman, Nielsen, Duffie, Lowrie and of course Anthony Quinn. Interesting Anthony Quinn played almost exactly the same amount games with Cronk as he did with Johns? Anthony won 54% with Joe and 71% with Cronk?
The Spectator
Roar Guru
Sorry mate I started to read but was totally over run with how off the cuff and structured Joey played as opposed to the structured Cronk, A Johns and J Thurston are above Cronk and all 3 are brilliant players.
Adam Bagnall
Roar Guru
At the same time your pointing to his superior rep record as your reasoning when he had such a great team around him, can't have it both ways. Your just looking at Cronks resume and coming to a fairly weak conclusion that he must have been the better player. I've followed the game for over 20 years and saw Johns, Thurston and Cronk, and Johns was the best. Cronk and Thurston probably equal
Evanfinity
Roar Pro
Thanks. I guess it depends on your criteria for judging halfbacks. You might say creativity outweighs game management, and others might not. Someone might weight “not getting belted about by Jamie Goddard” even higher, for example.
Evanfinity
Roar Pro
Thanks. So you’re saying that Cronk gets marked down because he played in, ostensibly, what was considered better company? And despite his better record at all levels of the game? That’s a slippery slope. You could then argue the best halfback played in a bush league because, weighted by the quality of his peers, he was relatively that much better. And I have to disagree that winning record is not a criteria for success. Rather, it’s the ultimate one. Maybe head to head johns would have outplayed Cronk - who knows. But if Cronks team ended up winning - then he arguably had played his role better, and winning is the goal.
Snoop Bloggy blog
Roar Rookie
Johns was great as is Cooper but they would both concede Thurston was the superior half to them both. The argument for Thurston being a weaker defender isn’t accurate either. Defense is all defending not just tackling. He wasn’t a strong tackler like Johns but his defensive reads and ability to plug holes are lightyears ahead of any other half. He nullified more attacking kicks than fullbacks.
Evanfinity
Roar Pro
Re: “I think rugby league, more than any other sport is a true team effort. So to point to team results as an indicator of greatness has some limitations” - isn’t statement this inconsistent within itself? If it’s a team effort, then by definition, shouldn’t individual results be judged in context of the team? I argue that if Cronk was from NSW he’d have a lot more individual accolades
elvis
Roar Rookie
Langer was a better halfback than all of them. He could create something from nothing, you can't coach that skill. Cronk was a very good cog in a very good machine. You aren't the best halfback of all time by being that.
Clanger McClunk
Guest
You sound like Cronk's mother would in your lavish praise. If Cronk is, not was, so good then why didn't he play against Newcastle on Friday night? A real team man would insist on playing rather than having a rest.
Bryce Burgess
Guest
Not only was Johns unequaled in skill and vision, he was a tough defender more than capable of playing hooker. Hence the reason he was picked there for NSW at times. At the time the Blues were flush with quality halves and the policy was to pick the best 17 and find them a position. Johns also didn’t play 13-14 years with two future Immortals (Smith and Slater) in his teams. The best he had at Newcastle were Buderus and O’Davis. Cronk moved from the most successful club of the decade to the second most successful which is a team of rep players with a great coach. He’s an excellent organiser and calm under pressure but doesn’t come close to Johns for creativity IMO.
Adam Bagnall
Roar Guru
Johns made other players around him look better. He had a lesser team around him and still won a comp, something Cronk has never had to worry about. Talking about Test and Origin records is irrelevant when comparing individual players too. Sorry, but Johns is still the better player, much better defender too
Dexter The Hamster
Roar Rookie
I think rugby league, more than any other sport is a true team effort. So to point to team results as an indicator of greatness has some limitations. Personally I would have Langer, Stirling, JT, Stuart and Johns all ahead of Cronk. In fact, if Pearce was a Qld'er and Cronk from NSW, then I think this whole argument might be put to bed.
Matt
Guest
Kimmorley around the turn of the century was an out and out match winner. The selectors realised that having he and Johns in the same side made Australia unbeatable and so one had to play out of position. The reality is that that team, with Lockyer, Hill and Fittler as well was full of play makers.
Superspud
Roar Rookie
It all depends on how you define it. John's could do things on the field that others including Cronk could only dream of but Cronk is more of a team player. Cronk makes those around him better players. To say he moved Thurston from half is a little bit far fetched though. That was because both had to be in the team and Cooper was less capable at 6 than Thurston.