Hanley is the finest British rugby player I have had the privilege to watch live and ranks up alongside Wally Lewis and Andrew Johns as one of the best players of the last 30 years or so

But it is an interesting question about how effective he would be in the modern game. He was almost the ‘prototype’ modern League player with immense athletic ability and talent but I think it is fair to say that this differentiator would be less now that all the players are that bit stronger and faster. Also, the game has changed so much – one of the most famous of Hanley’s tries was the length of the field effort down the right wing for Bradford beating man after man on the way. But I have to say, I don’t think he could score that try if it was today as the whole team now scrambles in defence much better (partly due to extra conditioning, partly better coaching)

However, having said that, Hanley would still be a great. He had already changed his game when he played for Leeds and his work rate was exceptional. He would bring that to SL plus a unique ability to beat the tackle. I think he would definitely be a loose forward in the modern game and he would be a great one

As a coach, trust me: skill levels are far higher than they have ever been.

So can you give us a brief outline of your coaching methods from say 1932, 1948, 1953, 1967, 1974, 1988, 1995.....

What's the relevance of my, or anyone's, coaching methods?

It isn't the method he is querying , it's how you are comparing them to the past he is questioning

Watching the game, or footage of the game from ye olden dayes.

So its your opinion as a ' viewer ' rather than a coach

I am also a RL coach , as I am sure are many others on these boards

As a viewer of ye oldene dayes and a coach and viewer of the modern day.

Skill levels are higher in facets of the game we've chosen to concentrate on. So dropped into a scrum in the sixties Keiron Cunningham would be right up at (or near) the top in terms of size, power, fitness etc. But given the rules of the game which dictated a high degree of specialisation (requiring years of experience to master) he'd be a weakness. In those days hookers were fundamental to keeping possession of the ball. More than one team lost a Challenge Cup Final because it couldn't field an experienced hooker. Sure, with ball in hand Cunningham would be a real handful. But you could imagine a clever number seven such as Murphy having an absolute field day kicking the ball into touch knowing full well his total lack of scrummaging skill would result in scrum after scrum being lost.

OK, so we've lost some of the RU legacy skills no longer relevant to the game.
KC would just play another position, in the same way that if he'd gone to RU he wouldn't throw the ball in at lineouts.

The irrelevant skills have been made up many times over by improvements in relevant skills.

I've got to be honest and say that the one skill being lost from the game that I don't lament is scrummaging. Like (I assume) everyone else here I watched the 'classic challenge cup final' replay from 1978 on BBC4 not all that long ago. And my immediate reaction to the scrums in that game were not "Oh man, that's awesome, I wish we had competitive scrums in modern RL", it was "What an absolutely shambolic god-awful mess, I'm glad we don't do that anymore".

I say scrap the scrum. It is useless in my opinion. It is just a way of starting the game up again, this could easily be done with a tap. It is very rare you see a set play from a scrum nowadays as well. Just get rid.