Greg Inglis vs Billy Slater

[Broncoman]

Slater because he works harder in attack and is all over the park non stop. Inglis is simply awesome no doubt about that but he hasn't been as dangerous in Origin for the last few years as he was when he started.

 

[subsbligh]

I wouldn't call Inglis lazy, but there's definitely an "Inglis factor".

I don't know whether it's an indirect effect of the team generally lifting, and that Inglis plays off the back of it, but if Inglis hasn't made a linebreak or scored or done something notable in the first 20 minutes, it's usually a very good indicator of whether the team he's playing for will win. When it's Origin time I start to get worried if you think to yourself that you haven't seen Inglis yet.

My guess is that he plays off the back of the team going forward and is so good can making the opposition pay once he gets the opportunities. Creating something from nothing in his own half he's not as good as Hayne, or simply turning up and being a threat on and off the ball every single tackle in attack, he's got nothing on Slater.

 

[Anonymous person]

EDIT: Bait

 

[broncos4life]

EDIT: Deleted quote

 

[Nashy]

AP. Drop your I told your so shit, it riles people up.

B4L. You've been warned, and recently banned. Add him to your ignore list FFS.

 

[Mr Fourex]

Hayne was definitely the best before he left. I still rate Inglis above Slater though. Australia had a really shit squad around him.

Yeah definitely .......if Inglis was out and Slater played, the call for Slater's head would be louder because he certainly wouldn't made one bit of difference to the result and IMO, he would have been made to look even more ordinary than Inglis was.

One player can't do it all on his own (*)......Australia had no go forward for the whole tournament and the halves and back line were dreadful.

(*) Perhaps Hayne could have. He is used to being the only man in the team who can do something (ala....Eels and the NSW team) without the help of his team mates.

 

[Big Pete]

The whole 'oh we've got to move GI to fullback and shift Slater to wing or out of the side altogether' reminds me so much of how some people wanted Cooper Cronk dropped for Daly Cherry-Evans.

We all saw how well that worked out. It's been the worst rep year since 05.

 

[Harry Sack]

The whole 'oh we've got to move GI to fullback and shift Slater to wing or out of the side altogether' reminds me so much of how some people wanted Cooper Cronk dropped for Daly Cherry-Evans.

We all saw how well that worked out. It's been the worst rep year since 05.

Once a better QLD centre steps up, it's a discussion worth having. Until then, it isn't IMO.

1. Slater
4. Inglis

...remains the way QLD/Aus should line up. As to who's better, as everyone's already said, it depends which Inglis shows up. Inglis is better I think, but Slater is far more consistent.

 

[Anonymous person]

Slater is a better fullback than Inglis in nearly every way, especially defensive positioning and reading the play to be in the right spot at the right time. Inglis is a stronger ball runner, but Slater has him for speed and agility. Slater doesn't need to run over people, he just runs around them like Johnson did to Inglis on the weekend.

Slater is the best fullback the game has ever seen IMO. He's been so consistently awesome for such a long time, and he does things no other players could do on a regular basis. Future immortal for sure.

 

[Harry Sack]

Slater is a better fullback than Inglis in nearly every way, especially defensive positioning and reading the play to be in the right spot at the right time. Inglis is a stronger ball runner, but Slater has him for speed and agility. Slater doesn't need to run over people, he just runs around them like Johnson did to Inglis on the weekend.

Slater is the best fullback the game has ever seen IMO. He's been so consistently awesome for such a long time, and he does things no other players could do on a regular basis. Future immortal for sure.

*waits for the outrage*

 

[Mr Fourex]

The whole 'oh we've got to move GI to fullback and shift Slater to wing or out of the side altogether' reminds me so much of how some people wanted Cooper Cronk dropped for Daly Cherry-Evans.

We all saw how well that worked out. It's been the worst rep year since 05.

Again it should be remembered that this was an injury ravaged rep year. The QLD side was a shadow of itself from the moment Cronk went off with a broken arm, 15 mins into game 1.

 

[Mr Fourex]

Slater is a better fullback than Inglis in nearly every way, especially defensive positioning and reading the play to be in the right spot at the right time. Inglis is a stronger ball runner, but Slater has him for speed and agility. Slater doesn't need to run over people, he just runs around them like Johnson did to Inglis on the weekend.

Slater is the best fullback the game has ever seen IMO. He's been so consistently awesome for such a long time, and he does things no other players could do on a regular basis. Future immortal for sure.

.....shame he never learnt how to pass the ball properly though.

 

[Unbreakable]

I'd probably agree with Slater being the best fullback of all time, Lockyer is a Five-Eighth in my book.

Not entirely sure what Queensland is going to do when Slater, Smith, Thurston & Cronk retire in a couple of years.

 

[Porthoz]

Yeah, Locky is definitely the better player overall, but he did play most of his career as 5/8, so I don't have too many issues with Slater getting the praise.

 

[vertigo]

People have been shitting on Slater this year because he hasn't be utterly dominating teams like he has for the better part of half a decade (thanks to injuries), if he's fit he's first picked at fullback.

Not entirely sure what Queensland is going to do when Slater, Smith, Thurston & Cronk retire in a couple of years.

It'll probably be like the Australian cricket team, one last hurrah thumping NSW then a painful rebuilding process.

 

[theshed]

Inglis has become the better of the two. He might not have the same skill set but he more then makes up for it.

Due to lack of better centre options abd Billy's chemistry with cam and Cronk, slater is the smarter rep option.

 

[Alec]

Inglis has become the better of the two. He might not have the same skill set but he more then makes up for it.

Due to lack of better centre options abd Billy's chemistry with cam and Cronk, slater is the smarter rep option.

Pretty much.

On Billy, he only had that 2 or 3 year period where he actually was good in every area...or mostly. Before that he was throwing passes over the sideline and jumping 60 metres into the air only to drop the ball trying to look good. Now he seems to have lost speed and become pretty injury prone. But at least he doesn't go full retard anywhere near as much.

His workrate was excellent, but he wasn't very reliable for most of his career.

 

[Renegade]

Inglis for mine, but that's based on a who'd you choose if both were at their peak. I'd loved to have seen Hodges at FB for his career, would've been an interesting comparison between the three as he potentially could've been the best of them (had the power, pace, agility and seems to have learnt a bit of playmaking as well) if he didn't have knee reco + busted achilles.