@JoshColeman99 said in [Harry Grant](/post/1173255) said:@fibrodreaming said in [Harry Grant](/post/1173238) said:@jirskyr said in [Harry Grant](/post/1173199) said: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.