Jones vs McCaw

With stories of McCaw running on his last legs and not a lot happening out our way...ran across this recently:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/opinion/9249224/Gifford-McCaw-is-greatest-modern-All-Black

I personally go for Jones but perhaps he had the larger than life image heroes seem to have in our youth...

"John Hart, who picked John Kirwan when he was a kid, and Joe Stanley when he was a veteran, and saw them become superb All Blacks, was asked this week who he thought was the greatest All Black of modern times.

His answer, "To me, clearly, Michael Jones. Without peer, a man who played all three loose forward positions, and with the skills to play in the midfield. A freak on the field, and a gentleman off it."

But without peer? Having had reported on Jones and McCaw at all their World Cups, on every test they've played in New Zealand, and a number overseas, may I make some comparisons between Jones and Richie McCaw.

Natural abilities? When Jones was an All Black, he was as fast over 10 metres as most of the wings, as expert with the football as the midfielders, as strong in the upper body as the props, and had a vertical leap as good as the locks - there virtually wasn't a position he couldn't have played. . McCaw's aerobic fitness equals anybody in the All Blacks, but he's got the biggest engine of anyone in rugby.

Adaptable? After a terrible knee injury in 1989 Jones largely moved from openside to blindside, and was quickly the best in the country at his new position. McCaw hasn't changed jerseys, but is a bigger, stronger, older version.

Inspirational? Joe Stanley, who played alongside Jones for Auckland and the All Blacks, says simply, "He's a freak. So much speed, such great anticipation, and always thinking."

Graham Henry says of McCaw, "If he hadn't been on the field we wouldn't have won the World Cup final (in 2011)."

Dealing with injury? In a 1989 test against Argentina in Wellington Jones'sknee joint was completely dislocated. Fifty one weeks after the injury he played a game of rugby, and at the end of the year toured France with the All Blacks.

McCaw played the final of the World Cup in 2011 with three breaks in one of the long bones that connects the ankle to the toes, of his right foot.

Intelligent? Jones had a good enough Masters degree in geography at Auckland University in 1994 to be offered a lecturing position at Massey University.

McCaw was an A+ student at Lincoln and could have won a Rhodes scholarship."

Controlled? Jones never threw a punch on the field, and the only person McCaw has ever hit was the thug who attacked referee David McHugh in Durban in 2002.

Captaincy? Jones's charm is his modesty, bordering on shyness, which is probably why he never captained a team at a high level.
Ad Feedback

By the 2011 World Cup McCaw had become a great captain.

If the Court of Rugby Fantasy Teams only allowed one? Purely on leadership, I'd pick McCaw. "

Phil Gifford does seem to have had a brain transplant after being one of the staunchest Auckland and Ponsonby supporters with his regular 'Susan of Herne Bay says' crackups in the 80's. Moving to Christchurch seems to do things to people- they make average players outstanding ones and perhaps convert rugby reporters to red and black.

For me Michael Jones stood out in two of the best sides ever to play the game- the AB's and Auks of the mid to late 80's. To have another 7 even mentioned in the same breath as Jones in McCaw means we are indeed a very lucky bunch of fans down here.

Much of McCaw's currency is in his leadership so comparisons with Jones are hard.

But Jones was the better player for me and though it is hard to think anyone could be a greater All Black, McCaw is a class act with his inspired leadership, affable nature, and perennial form.

McCaw wins it for me.

Yes, we have been blessed to see both of these two very special opensides, for sheer athleticism and as a master of the no7 position my vote also goes to Jones (Sorry Kia) he was able to win a turnover, win a lineout then score  a try, all in the one passage of play.

I cant remember where I heard it, but Joe Stanley once said "it wasnt just that Jones did things that other players didnt do, it was more that Jones thought to do things  that other players just wouldnt think of doing".

Don't worry Laurie.   Jones was a guy easy to admire. Even in an Auckland shirt. I couldn't say the same about Fitzy or much of that Auckland pack, but in black it never matters where they're from.

Although McCaw has never changed formally his position - at least in terms of a permanent move having played the odd game at 8 - I do think he has done to some extent what Jones did whilst still wearing the number 7 on his shirt. He's adapted to the players around him and that the modern backrow player is more malleable in terms of duties.

It's a bit of fun to compare different players from different eras but I think we have been lucky to have had what most people consider the finest examples of their position in modern rugby.

The impact McCaw has made on the rugby landscape is undeniable, regardless of Jones' ability the fact is McCaw has changed the way players compete at rucks, and for me rucks are the most important aspect of modern day rugby.

People often suggest McCaw is a cheater, but the reality is he has been doing that for a decade and is still "getting away with it"

Certianly if he was doing anything illegal he would have been marked by referees across the globe which hasn't happened, as much as I hate seeing him on a team sheet, you have to respect the man for how he adapts to referees and game situations.

Wasn't this discussed at length a few months ago?

I seem to remember the older posters thought it was Jones and the younger posters thought it was McCaw.

Thanks Cyril I feel young at heart.   

It's more to do with Christchurch and Auckland though. Hand on my heart McCaw is the best. Take it off and Jones starts to look a better option. All friendly banter as we all know Auckland makes boys into men and Christchurch turns men into rugby gods...

McCaw will play on a Sunday.

Just saying.

Jones was more violent than McCaw because he also strictly adhered to and fundamentally torn between the two Christian principles of do unto others as they would to you and it is better to give than to receive.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Thanks Cyril I feel young at heart.   

It's more to do with Christchurch and Auckland though. Hand on my heart McCaw is the best. Take it off and Jones starts to look a better option. All friendly banter as we all know Auckland makes boys into men and Christchurch turns men into rugby gods...

Quite true there Kia...interestingly- Read, McCaw and DC are now probably in the 'best ever AB' (MJ debate aside- plus we can put him at 6) group, where before the 3, Canterbury would likely not have any- Merts, Marshall and possibly G Bachop the only three that would likely get a mention where the Auk names would flood the room. Thats been the one frustrating thing for me- Aucks presence and sxv standing through the GH/ Hansen era. Had it been anywhere near its 80's and early 90's heydays hard to imagine how much stronger the AB's could have been.

Thats why its important JK and Henry really get in underneath the hood in Auckland, stop the wave of youth to League. Signs last year JK was turning the tide and with the new AB's and their 2013 experiences they've got to be a force this year...though I seem to be saying something like that about this time every year...  

Surprised Big Jonah doesn't get a look in actually as he defined pro rugby and was a herald of things to come in 95….and best of all time for me will always be Meads with Shelford not far behind

For me Jonahs the best ball carrier the games ever seen. Ball in hand from the 50 yard line would carry the ball further against the best defence than any single other player, either through or around it. If you were to pick a side from the best players of all time, in their best form, selecting alternatively against someone else I'd say most would pick Lomu first- because of all players you wouldn't want him on the other side.

But hes definitely limited to ball carrying. He wasnt a kicker in any respect- from memory I cant remember him kicking the ball once. High ball and defence were ok but he had difficulty getting to players at times where he had to turn. But if he got to them he sure put them down.

In NZ its common to still call Mead's the greatest ever AB- a recent poll (2 or 3 years ago) even confirmed it. Its only because he was so long ago that he drops off the list at times.

I think with Jones its this x factor quality that keeps his name up there. He did things the game had never seen before from the position and with the ball, the lines he ran, the brutal acceleration, and the way he could kill an opposition attack stone cold dead with a tackle so well timed that you'd shudder....'ooooooh!' with nothing more to say. Hes the player I think everyone wished they could be.

Taylorman wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Thanks Cyril I feel young at heart.   

It's more to do with Christchurch and Auckland though. Hand on my heart McCaw is the best. Take it off and Jones starts to look a better option. All friendly banter as we all know Auckland makes boys into men and Christchurch turns men into rugby gods...

Quite true there Kia...interestingly- Read, McCaw and DC are now probably in the 'best ever AB' (MJ debate aside- plus we can put him at 6) group, where before the 3, Canterbury would likely not have any- Merts, Marshall and possibly G Bachop the only three that would likely get a mention where the Auk names would flood the room. Thats been the one frustrating thing for me- Aucks presence and sxv standing through the GH/ Hansen era. Had it been anywhere near its 80's and early 90's heydays hard to imagine how much stronger the AB's could have been.

Thats why its important JK and Henry really get in underneath the hood in Auckland, stop the wave of youth to League. Signs last year JK was turning the tide and with the new AB's and their 2013 experiences they've got to be a force this year...though I seem to be saying something like that about this time every year...  

I rate Read extremely highly but would you hold him above Zinzan just yet?

No doubt already an outstanding player who will likely go down as one of the greats but as with most ABs positions it's a big shout to name him the best! That's without mentioning Shelford either...

But the greatest All Black strikes me a shaving something else other than pure rugby skill which alludes to a character that reflects the ideal and brand and leadership. Meads and McCaw have that in spades but for me players like Fitz do not.

There are many AB players that could contend for greatest player of all time yet alone greatest AB.

king_carlos wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Thanks Cyril I feel young at heart.   

It's more to do with Christchurch and Auckland though. Hand on my heart McCaw is the best. Take it off and Jones starts to look a better option. All friendly banter as we all know Auckland makes boys into men and Christchurch turns men into rugby gods...

Quite true there Kia...interestingly- Read, McCaw and DC are now probably in the 'best ever AB' (MJ debate aside- plus we can put him at 6) group, where before the 3, Canterbury would likely not have any- Merts, Marshall and possibly G Bachop the only three that would likely get a mention where the Auk names would flood the room. Thats been the one frustrating thing for me- Aucks presence and sxv standing through the GH/ Hansen era. Had it been anywhere near its 80's and early 90's heydays hard to imagine how much stronger the AB's could have been.

Thats why its important JK and Henry really get in underneath the hood in Auckland, stop the wave of youth to League. Signs last year JK was turning the tide and with the new AB's and their 2013 experiences they've got to be a force this year...though I seem to be saying something like that about this time every year...  

I rate Read extremely highly but would you hold him above Zinzan just yet?

No doubt already an outstanding player who will likely go down as one of the greats but as with most ABs positions it's a big shout to name him the best! That's without mentioning Shelford either...

Been a bit of debate on this over the year:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/opinion/9490665/Of-all-the-eight-greats-rollicking-Read-the-best

but I actually preferred Shelford over Zinny, who took forever to get as good as he became.

Taylorman wrote:For me Jonahs the best ball carrier the games ever seen. Ball in hand from the 50 yard line would carry the ball further against the best defence than any single other player, either through or around it. If you were to pick a side from the best players of all time, in their best form, selecting alternatively against someone else I'd say most would pick Lomu first- because of all players you wouldn't want him on the other side.

But hes definitely limited to ball carrying. He wasnt a kicker in any respect- from memory I cant remember him kicking the ball once. High ball and defence were ok but he had difficulty getting to players at times where he had to turn. But if he got to them he sure put them down.

In NZ its common to still call Mead's the greatest ever AB- a recent poll (2 or 3 years ago) even confirmed it. Its only because he was so long ago that he drops off the list at times.

I think with Jones its this x factor quality that keeps his name up there. He did things the game had never seen before from the position and with the ball, the lines he ran, the brutal acceleration, and the way he could kill an opposition attack stone cold dead with a tackle so well timed that you'd shudder....'ooooooh!' with nothing more to say. Hes the player I think everyone wished they could be.

i would agree with Jonah being a very strong and devastating ball carrier, but I can also think of a couple of players who were very elusive and also bery fast that were also great ball carriers, such as Cullen or Chris Latham.

Greatest ball carrier can mean different things in my view.

Yes my appraisal of Lomu is all things considered. I'd still think when selecting the side one would select Lomu before Cullen or Latham purely due to the fact that they risk having Lomu against them. They might 'hope' to select Cullen or Larkham next but they wouldn't allow Lomu to go to the opposition. That would be considered mad I would think.

The Meads vs Jones comparison...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/18879/Michael-Jones-the-best

Interesting Carling had him at no. 2 behind Edwards in his top 50. McCaw would probably rate higher than 27 now given its a 2007 article.

A player like Goldie was the complete winger. Had everything that the likes of Sivivatu or Big Joe didn't have. Jane is a modern case example. Sometimes you don't need a player to do something amazing. You just need to know that they won't do something amazingly bad. Jonah or Joe in 2009 had their achilles heels exposed but they did perform magic that made them indispensable. You need a good balance of Conrad Smiths and Jonahs but it's often the latter getting the plaudits and the former not being fully appreciated until they're injured or not playing and often only then you fully realise what you are missing out on. Many times these best teams miss out or ignore the super reliable players in favour of the superstars but ultimately both are integral to your side.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Jones was more violent than McCaw because he also strictly adhered to and fundamentally torn between the two Christian principles of do unto others as they would to you and it is better to give than to receive.

Brilliant bit of wit there!

Taylorman wrote:
Been a bit of debate on this over the year:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/opinion/9490665/Of-all-the-eight-greats-rollicking-Read-the-best

but I actually preferred Shelford over Zinny, who took forever to get as good as he became.

Cheers for that link T-man. Interesting reading, especially given I'm woefully uninformed on certain players such as Mexted and Lochore due to them being before my time unfortunately.

Also love this passage from Todd Blackadder when summing up Read's ball carrying;

"The point of difference with Reado is his physicality. He's a tough man, the sort of man you want in a crisis. He does everything so well, but when he carries the ball, holy s**t."

Succinctly put!  

ChequeredJersey wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Jones was more violent than McCaw because he also strictly adhered to and fundamentally torn between the two Christian principles of do unto others as they would to you and it is better to give than to receive.

Brilliant bit of wit there!

He did actually say after begin asked what he thought about being tackled hard that it was better to give than receive, don't know about the do unto others thing but being a religious chap he may well have.