Hi Wrighty. Your point somewhat stands when talking about the Raiders this year but they have yet to win a premiership and I think the Storm are odds on favourites with Hughes coming back and there are always outliers.
Since 2011 when we were last in the grand final here are the halves combos which won the premiership.
2024 - Penrith - Cleary & Luai
2023 - Penrith - Cleary & Luai
2022 - Penrith - Cleary & Luai
2021 - Penrith - Cleary & Luai
2020 - Melbourne - Munster & Hughes
2019 - Sydney City - Keary & Cronk
2018 - Sydney City - Keary & Cronk
2017 - Melbourne - Munster & Cronk
2016 - Cronulla - Maloney & Townsend
2015 - North Queensland - Morgan & Thurston
2014 - South Sydney - Keary & Reynolds
2013 - Sydney City - Maloney & Pearce
2012 - Melbourne - Widdop & Cronk
2011 - Manly - Foran & DCE
This supports my position that you need two very good halves to win a premiership.
The only year that did not happen above is 2016 when Townsend won a premiership but Melbourne really should have won that game and Cronulla had the peptide scandal but did not have their premiership taken off then. It is the outlier.
Further supporting this is that the only 2 times we have reached the grand final were 2002 and 2011. In 2011 we have a halves combo of Maloney & Johnson and in 2002 we had arguably our greatest ever half Stacey Jones.
So perhaps once every 14 years a team may win the comp with 1 average half and 1 very good half. The other 13 times the team winning the comp had 2 very good halves. It is not the only reason they won but it is a big factor.
Hi Warriors55
Thanks for researching this. I need to be careful in pushing too far as I accept that rugby league logic is you are correct. Especially based on this conclusive evidence you have provided.
I concede you are correct based on this evidence - thanks for digging all of this.
Sometimes some of my views are not based on sporting precedents but based on my MBA and studies of competitive strategies.
According to business strategies you are supposed to form a strategy, based on your competencies or accessible competencies rather than trying to develop competencies that don't exist natively in your organisation. Top level forwards are in our system and coming through the ranks. MBA theory is to double down on what you are good at and make that a point of difference rather than try to be good at everything.
Secondly if everyone else is following an established blue print that you need elite halves to win the Grand Final then what makes us think we can do that better than everyone else when they have more access to ever giving stocks of Australian halves when our natural market of NZ youngsters rarely gives us an elite half. To get Linnane we had to take a flyer on an injured recovering teenager others had given up on. The blue chip candidates aren't going to come here. We are more like to succeed if we Zag when everyone else Zigs.
That's all that was driving my posts really:
1) Is it realistic we can get two elite halves? Not really in my view so lets just focus on forwards and try to win that way
2) Why can't there be a first for everything where a team so dominant in the forwards wins it all with two bog average halves.
Michael Witt was not great and went places with him. And as we both agree Fogarty and Strange are good but no one regards them as elite and they could win it all.
However you have answered my question so I thank you and I feel more educated on the topic by reading your post. I am happy to leave this with you are right and I am wrong as my remaining points are academic based on MBA competitive strategies for businesses trying to survive in competitive market places.