Firstly, I said passive aggressive - look it up if you don't know what it means. Secondly, I was talking about your general posting style on here, not your view on Brian Bevan in respect of which I'm struggling to think of something I care less about.

OK pumpkin?

How childish some users on here are, that a thread about the great player Brian Bevan has ended up into one of throwing childish insults at an older poster who has actually seen Bevan play not just read about him like we have. You should learn a bit of respect.

Which is all you need to know about the "great" Brain Bevan.

It is annoying when you are shown up by stupid trolls, Sally.

Fair and balanced discussion with someone who has seen the guy play would be refreshing. Not a dick measuring competition putting him down and saying BB (who happened to play at Wigan) was the much better player out of the two of them, just because he had played in more positions (so by Rogues logic Grix is better than Joey Johns) Then misquoting BB and finally saying he wasn't one of the all time greats (merely a great winger).

Well I saw nearly every game that Brian Bevan played between 1947 and 1962. Apart from the excitement every time he touched the ball, the reason he was the greatest was that he took a generally mediocre team - Warrington - and made them into a team who were always contenders and sometimes worldbeaters. Boston, Vollenhoven and Hanley were all greats but all of them played in great teams and none had the transforming effect that Bevan did. Neil Fox was the nearest to Bev in those terms. Bevan could do things which were technically impossible and there has never been anyone remotely like him since.

I didn't see anything Rogues said that put Bevan down, he's allowed to think someone else was a better player. In fact I've never heard anyone outside Warrington fans regard Bevan as the greatest player of all time. The argument about playing in the more pivotal positions is a fair one, remember the outrage on here a couple of years ago when Pat Richards got Man of Steel ahead of Michael Monaghan, people said how could a winger possibly be regarded as the most influential player? Also if Rogues was being so biased why did he have to put a Warrington great (Murphy) as one of his choices for greatest player of all time ahead of greats like Hanley, Edwards, Gregory and Bell?

I agree with Sally. Rogues is perfectly entitled to pass an opinion. After all he did watch all four of the players he mentioned (I missed Bev, but saw the other three). My opinion of Bevan was based on his stats, which are unbelievable, books (The Great Bev is a superb read), the occasional bit of film, and things that people who saw him have told me. Anyone who could put 5,000 on the gate just by appearing must have been something really special.
I would also refer anyone to Billy Boston himself when in an argument re Bevan, his opinion as someone who played against him is something to be valued.

, looloo and, maybe, SoL had all had equally or more impressive years) . If I remember correctly, the concern was not that Pat had had a good point scoring tally or that he had more or less remained consistent in his point scoring (not necessarily due to his ability to score or lead- he was in a truly ahead of their time Wigan team full of class- kicks came easy) the concern came that the 'man of Steel' trophy was going to a kicker where previous winners (Graham and Roby) were moulded as go forward leaders (befitting the title man of STEEL). However,Pat Richards is one of the best wingers to come to super league (Wigan fans would say THE best- and they have every right to think that)

Knowing Rogues (which I thankfully don't) it is probably because Murphy spent more time at St Helens and Leigh, than he did at Warrington. Bevan was, too all intents etc, a 'one club man' and that club was Warrington. The same way some people have a blind gut reaction to the Wigan greats (like Hanley and Offiiah) Rogues has that reaction to Warrington players, it appears- especially WArrington youth set-up

I hated KC, but I can admit he is one of the best hookers I've seen (and probably to ever play the game)

As Ian stated, no one is having a go at the players or who was better. It is Rogues tiresome e a few people are sick of.

jd you're being too paranoid, Rogues hasn't said anything wrong. Teesidewire made a bold claim that Bevan's try scoring record makes him the greatest player in either code of all time, and Rogues said Bevan was a great winger but didn't think he was the greatest of all time, he would have said Murphy or Boston. When you make a claim that anybody is the greatest of all time it is always going to invite debate....that doesn't mean disrespect to the players concerned. It's like saying Don Bradman is the greatest batsman of all time, someone will say no its Tendulkar, or saying Joe Montana is the greatest quarterback of all time, someone else will say it's Dan Marino or Peyton Manning.

Nowhere did Rogues 'go out of his way to demote the effort Bevan put into a mediocre Warrington team' as you say, just saying someone else is better isn't demoting it, if you think that's "truck loads of trolling poop" then you need to chill out a bit.

As for Pat Richards winning Man of Steel, it's odd that when Richards won it, he supposedly only got it for his goalkicking because he was the top points scorer....but when Deacon, Henry Paul, Sinfield etc were top points scorers they never won it, that has never been criteria, I'm sure Richards consistency with the boot didn't do any harm but he was the best all round winger in the league that year and probably the best outside back in the league so that made a good case for him. Brett Hodgson won Man of Steel the year before and he was a consistent kicker too but I bet it wasn't just because of his goalkicking....if it's voted for by players then unless they regard kicking as being the definitive part of the game like in union they will think of other characteristics.

I was hoping it would provoke some debate, but as usual it's turned into a prick measuring and slagging off contest. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, so long as there's a bit of sense in it. I understand what Rogues is trying to get at, but it doesn't mean that I agree with him.
Ask him what he thought of Parry G, you might actually be pleasantly surprised.
By the way, Bevan, for a lot of his career, wasn't in a mediocre Warrington side. Those teams from 1946 up to about 1957 cannot be classed as mediocre if you look at the players at the club during that period.

Well, quite. Utter nonsense from jdrocket as is often the case. In the period Bevan was at Warrington, they won the title 3 times, were runners up twice, won the Cup twice and the Lancashire League several times. That is not, by any stretch, mediocrity - indeed, it is almost certainly the most gilded period in the club's entire history.

come on Sal stop it If I could be ar$ed I can dig up a post where Rogues thinks Billy Mcginty at Wigan was better than Mike Gregory..............

he's a joke and you know it your just cutting him some slack in order to the wire fans off like you like to do in your own little way.

Its funny that some of the best wingers ever to play the game - Bevan and from an earlier era Rosenfield and Eric Harris - were all Aussies who most Aussies have never heard of because they played the vast majority of their rugby in England. Its a real shame that Australia didn't/wouldn't (can't remember why) pick players based in England. IIRC Bevan only every played for Other Nationalities at a time when GB was regularly beating Australia?

Sal, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I would like to quickly clear up a few things, though.

Rogues didn't say that Bevan 'wasn't the greatest of all time' he said, and I quote,
That isn't debating that is just baiting Warrington fans who believe he is the greatest player to play for us. I never saw Bevan, obviously, but I understand what he means to the club and his stats emphasise how great he was. You cannot say that Rogues wasn't belittling the input of Bevan. Come on, Sal, you can't play the ironic devil's advocate on that one.

Rogues is starting to get on my tits with his constant one eyed pie e. The constant put down of the youth team, the old boy's club comments, the Bridge incident. He's like a Woody toy, but instead of pulling the string and getting 'there's a snake in my boot', you get 'all your best players are over 30'. That is the truckload of e spewwing from him, which I was referring to. (I may not be the best but considering what this guy is supposed to know about rugby- he doesn't show it)

Finally, I will repeat, I never really understood the Richards thing and I can't remember what I said at the time. I thought Graham or Monaghan were front runners for the MOS that year and was surprised Pat Richards won it for goal kicking. I don't hate him for it (as you said other kickers have won- I don't know much about that) and I don't think he is 'just a great winger', he's a great player and means something to the Wigan team. I would direct your ire on this subject towards someone who did then and still holds a grudge.

Got to agree totally. Although before my time (a child of the 60's), we weren't mediocre during that period by any stretch.

Alas, Mr Rocket is still at it this morning, trying to defend his position by assuming the more words you use, the better the point, I could go on but....