From runners stood still, to runners running at half speed, at a defensive line that isn't moving. The game has moved on.

I'm not sure that's fair, he just has a strong opinion and isn't reticent about expressing it!

I think you're on safe ground in thinking that the modern players are, on average, stronger and better conditioned than the semi-pro days and that allows them to maintain the tempo in defence for longer. On top of that, I think the play the balls were referee'd differently, and the modern game has less messing about for right or wrong.

But I'm not convinced the modern player is [ifaster[/i or a better ball handler in such a significant way.

Very appreciative comments there for someone who has an opposing view. Makes a great change from the "I'm right, you're wrong, so we must hate each other and bicker" kind of attitude that is has become more than the norm on here.

I would say the modern player IS faster due to the training techniques, etc. But only faster in the body. Cognitive wise, and I wouldn't say there is much of a difference, if any. I don't think players can think faster now than they used to be able to. I think they just need to due to the increased speed of the game.
I also think that the majority of players are better ball handlers now than back in the day, but the standards of the best ball handlers is not that much different. It's just the worst players aren't as bad as they used to be, which means the best players don't look as good as they used to. I think this is one of the reasons why people constantly look back and think there were "better" teams in earlier days, when really it's just a case of the worst teams are getting better and making the best teams look poorer.

No probs - I have a sneaking suspicion that you're better equipped than I am to comment on many of the aspects we've discussed with authority.



While I know that the additional strength in a modern player can certainly add more power, which obviously helps speed in specific cases (look at the size of olympic sprinters, for example), I think the additional bulk may cut into that a bit.

I think "natural pace" may well be reasonably constant in the general sporting population, with only the very elite (who only run, nothing else) being significantly faster now than, say, 20 years ago. I certainly don't think the difference is as marked as it is with raw power and stamina, at least.



Seems fair enough to me - but I feel honour bound to mention the 5m rule at this point, even though defences are faster and better organised now.

Great argument this.
Im with Wellsy though 100%, im just not as good as explaining it


You dont have to have done a coaching course to realise the bread basket isnt where a ball should go! I figured that out by age 8

I wouldn't know if I was better equipped, but I have just done a PE degree which had a biomechanics part to it, which is why I'm very vocal in the forward pass/momentum argument. It also had an elite sports preparation and training module, but without being an elite athlete or being involved in an elite set-up, I can only know so much about that!


Seems fair enough, but I would certainly say that the slower players are faster than they used to be. The faster players may not be much faster, if at all, but the slower ones aren't as slow.



Well that's just opening up a totally new can of worms!

But to stick on topic, you'd totally change the whole foundation of the game if you got rid of the rule that allows for momentum. I think more needs to be done in order to catch out forward passes though. In a day an age that we have hawk-eye technology, etc, surely there must be something that could be used?

Assuming we all accept the players momentum effects the eventual trajectory of the ball, who is best placed to judge the direction of the players hands, the ref(who could be at any angle) or touch judge(who should be parallel)?

Think you pretty much answer your own question there...

Could we please stop talking about the 'momentum' rule. The player's momentum is irrelevant. The quantity that affects the trajectory of the ball is his velocity.

Momentum cannot be ignored when passing a ball whilst on the run. It's simple physics.

If two players passed a ball in the same direction from the same point at the same velocity, but one player was running and the other was static, they wouldn't end up in the same place.

Momentum is mass times velocity - for the purposes of the discussion, they're pretty interchangable.

I am pretty surprised Boots 'n' All have never done a feature on this, considering Stevo is always harking on about it, as well as the RFL's connections with Carnegie (who have some very good biomechanics facilities).

All it would take is a few light-gates to record the speed of the objects involved (i.e. player and ball) and a few cameras to record the "phenomenon" happening (one parallel to the player and on above looking down) and you've got a simple demonstration as to the effects a player running with the ball has on it's path regardless of the direction it was thrown in.

I may email them actually...