Harry Grant

[Russell]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He proved that he was a reliable robot as well for Origin and Australia with more great players around him.

The two words to describe Cronk that come to mind are reliable and consistant.

Nothing else imo.

 

[fibrodreaming]

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback.

I am simply drawing the obvious conclusion of his comments. The implication of his advice to Grant is that Cronk does not have a high opinion of his own abilities. He said that if he played for a lesser team his career may have only extended for 100 games.

Obviously he is being disingenuous. He would obviously have had a long career whoever he played for. He was a very good half (not great) and he is exaggerating his case in order to convince Grant to return to Melbourne.

It is a self-serving argument (he is a stooge for Melbourne) and he has felt the need to denigrate his own abilities as well as our club in order to make his case.

 

[JC99]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but **he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.**

you mean, in other great teams?

Against the best players in the world he was still a class above. Average players who do well in the storm system rarely do that

 

[JC99]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He proved that he was a reliable robot as well for Origin and Australia with more great players around him.

The two words to describe Cronk that come to mind are reliable and consistant.

Nothing else imo.

Not many halves in the modern game are reliable and consistent though that’s my point. Bloke didn’t have a bad game playing one of the hardest positions. Incredibly smart footballer who rarely ever made errors out on the field

 

[JC99]

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback.

I am simply drawing the obvious conclusion of his comments. The implication of his advice to Grant is that Cronk does not have a high opinion of his own abilities. He said that if he played for a lesser team his career may have only extended for 100 games.

Obviously he is being disingenuous. He would obviously have had a long career whoever he played for. He was a very good half (not great) and he is exaggerating his case in order to convince Grant to return to Melbourne.

It is a self-serving argument (he is a stooge for Melbourne) and he has felt the need to denigrate his own abilities as well as our club in order to make his case.

He’s trying his best to get grant at either rooster or storm that’s for sure

 

[Cairnstigers]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He took the easy road when he left Melbourne
A great player can shine at any club

 

[JC99]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He took the easy road when he left Melbourne
A great player can shine at any club

Yeah he joined a strong club but he also notably improved that team when he joined as well and was always one of their best. To think if he went to a weaker team he would just be an average player is crazy.

 

[Cairnstigers]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He took the easy road when he left Melbourne
A great player can shine at any club

Yeah he joined a strong club but he also notably improved that team when he joined as well and was always one of their best. To think if he went to a weaker team he would just be an average player is crazy.

I'm not saying he would have been an average player
I'm saying he took the easy road/ option
Should he have joined a weaker team and succeeded, he would have been thought of as a legend

 

[JC99]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He took the easy road when he left Melbourne
A great player can shine at any club

Yeah he joined a strong club but he also notably improved that team when he joined as well and was always one of their best. To think if he went to a weaker team he would just be an average player is crazy.

I'm not saying he would have been an average player
I'm saying he took the easy road/ option
Should he have joined a weaker team and succeeded, he would have been thought of as a legend

Others are saying it though it seems. Definitely would’ve been a legend but I can’t blame him for moving to roosters for his last two years before he retires

 

[Russell]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He proved that he was a reliable robot as well for Origin and Australia with more great players around him.

The two words to describe Cronk that come to mind are reliable and consistant.

Nothing else imo.

Not many halves in the modern game are reliable and consistent though that’s my point. Bloke didn’t have a bad game playing one of the hardest positions. Incredibly smart footballer who rarely ever made errors out on the field

We know all that....the point is how good would he have been, how many errors would he have made, how many of his kicks would have been scored off...

IF HE HAD PLAYED FOR THE TITANS?

Would have been about as good as Ashley Taylor imo.

 

[JC99]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He proved that he was a reliable robot as well for Origin and Australia with more great players around him.

The two words to describe Cronk that come to mind are reliable and consistant.

Nothing else imo.

Not many halves in the modern game are reliable and consistent though that’s my point. Bloke didn’t have a bad game playing one of the hardest positions. Incredibly smart footballer who rarely ever made errors out on the field

We know all that....the point is how good would he have been, how many errors would he have made, how many of his kicks would have been scored off...

IF HE HAD PLAYED FOR THE TITANS?

Would have been about as good as Ashley Taylor imo.

No chance sure he might not win premiershipa but his kicking game, passing game and game management are top notch doesn’t matter what team he’s in

 

[Russell]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He proved that he was a reliable robot as well for Origin and Australia with more great players around him.

The two words to describe Cronk that come to mind are reliable and consistant.

Nothing else imo.

Not many halves in the modern game are reliable and consistent though that’s my point. Bloke didn’t have a bad game playing one of the hardest positions. Incredibly smart footballer who rarely ever made errors out on the field

We know all that....the point is how good would he have been, how many errors would he have made, how many of his kicks would have been scored off...

IF HE HAD PLAYED FOR THE TITANS?

Would have been about as good as Ashley Taylor imo.

No chance sure he might not win premiershipa but his kicking game, passing game and game management are top notch doesn’t matter what team he’s in

Yes it does, because he hasn't got the really good players to take advantage of it.

 

[TillLindemann]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He proved that he was a reliable robot as well for Origin and Australia with more great players around him.

The two words to describe Cronk that come to mind are reliable and consistant.

Nothing else imo.

Not many halves in the modern game are reliable and consistent though that’s my point. Bloke didn’t have a bad game playing one of the hardest positions. Incredibly smart footballer who rarely ever made errors out on the field

We know all that....the point is how good would he have been, how many errors would he have made, how many of his kicks would have been scored off...

IF HE HAD PLAYED FOR THE TITANS?

Would have been about as good as Ashley Taylor imo.

Yeah I agree. Thurston's success with the Cowboys is more impressive than Cronk's with Melbourne and the Roosters, even if he didn't get the same silverware.

 

[JD Tiger]

Cronk imo was a really good organiser. Based his game on consistency. He had very little flair, attacking genius, and therefore wasn't great. Johns (albeit a drug cheat), Thurston, Benji, they are the halves who have had greatness in their games throughout the last couple of decades.

Cronk was a better organiser than many others, probably most others, but even that is hard to measure as for almost of his career he had Smith next to him who did the same role. Deciding how to break up that organisational influence between the two is near impossible. Even in Cronk's final 2 years, his only 2 years away from Smith, he had a Roosters side around him who also had expertise in game management in Keary, so it is still hard to gauge precisely how good he was.

If we went to a team which lacked that, perhaps we could have seen more clearly what his abilities actually were, but he choose not to for whatever reason, so it's hard to really say.

 

[JC99]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He proved that he was a reliable robot as well for Origin and Australia with more great players around him.

The two words to describe Cronk that come to mind are reliable and consistant.

Nothing else imo.

Not many halves in the modern game are reliable and consistent though that’s my point. Bloke didn’t have a bad game playing one of the hardest positions. Incredibly smart footballer who rarely ever made errors out on the field

We know all that....the point is how good would he have been, how many errors would he have made, how many of his kicks would have been scored off...

IF HE HAD PLAYED FOR THE TITANS?

Would have been about as good as Ashley Taylor imo.

No chance sure he might not win premiershipa but his kicking game, passing game and game management are top notch doesn’t matter what team he’s in

Yes it does, because he hasn't got the really good players to take advantage of it.

Even when storm or roosters were on the back foot plenty of times he would turn a game around with his kicking and game management. To say he would only be the level of ash Taylor is genuinely hilarious ? like I said he wouldn’t of got all the accolades but he still would’ve been a great half for any team.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

We have been at the rough end of the stick with blokes walking out on contracts on a few occasions now and people are advocating for the club to engage in practices like that? I'll be buggered if we start carrying on the way Parra does to get a player to break contract. I want Grant here next year as much as anyone, but I don't want him doing it the wrong way, and I especially don't want the club encouraging any underhanded behaviour.

 

[JC99]

We have been at the rough end of the stick with blokes walking out on contracts on a few occasions now and people are advocating for the club to engage in practices like that? I'll be buggered if we start carrying on the way Parra does to get a player to break contract. I want Grant here next year as much as anyone, but I don't want him doing it the wrong way, and I especially don't want the club encouraging any underhanded behaviour.

If you can’t beat them, join them. Good teams steal other players simple as that we don’t have time to worry about morals we need to win 😂

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

We have been at the rough end of the stick with blokes walking out on contracts on a few occasions now and people are advocating for the club to engage in practices like that? I'll be buggered if we start carrying on the way Parra does to get a player to break contract. I want Grant here next year as much as anyone, but I don't want him doing it the wrong way, and I especially don't want the club encouraging any underhanded behaviour.

If you can’t beat them, join them. Good teams steal other players simple as that we don’t have time to worry about morals we need to win ?

On the contrary I believe the NRL should clamp down on it rather than the problem getting bigger and endorsing our club behaving that way.

 

[diedpretty]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He took the easy road when he left Melbourne
A great player can shine at any club

Yeah he joined a strong club but he also notably improved that team when he joined as well and was always one of their best. To think if he went to a weaker team he would just be an average player is crazy.

To me the rorters have got better since he left. Their attack is far less structured and hence far more dangerous. Cronk could never play unstructured heads up football.

 

[JC99]

He starts with an established good side, containing some of the GOATs, then leaves for the only other team that has a strike rate anywhere near as good as Melbourne’s. I can understand that but can’t respect it, nor can I respect his comments.

My interpretation is that Cronk is basically saying that he was a decent half back only, and that he had to play in great teams in order to make him look good.

Accordingly, if he played in a struggle-street team like the Tigers, his career would probably have lasted only 100 games or so.

Which means, that if he had joined the WT instead of Easts a few years back, his lack of greatness would have been obvious to all and his reputation would have been tarnished.

In providing his self-serving advice to Grant (which he dresses up as "fatherly" advice to a rookie) he not only denigrates our club and our coach, he also denigrates himself as a player.

However, Harry Grant is more than just a decent dummy half. Rather, he appears destined for greatness, and I would back him to shine in any company. Unlike Cronk, he doesn't need great players around him to make him look good.

Think you’re being a bit harsh on Cronks ability he was a terrific halfback. His career would’ve been different if we was at a weaker club no doubt but he was still fantastic as a player, showed it at origin level and Australian level too.

He took the easy road when he left Melbourne
A great player can shine at any club

Yeah he joined a strong club but he also notably improved that team when he joined as well and was always one of their best. To think if he went to a weaker team he would just be an average player is crazy.

To me the rorters have got better since he left. Their attack is far less structured and hence far more dangerous. Cronk could never play unstructured heads up football.

They’re doing just as good if not worse than last year. They’re scoring more points it seems but they’ve lost a few games as well. Could also go down to the rule changes too they started killing it as soon as they came in