|
 |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4784 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2020 | Dec 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Ruddy Duck="Ruddy Duck"
And he also brought some amazing rugby in attack; iron wall defence, a never say die attitude and of course wins in all major competitions.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4784 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2020 | Dec 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote 100% Warrior="100% Warrior"I can name some but I don’t see the point. You clearly aren’t a fan of impact players, which is fine by the way it’s not a criticism of you but me naming some won’t change your mind.
Re balance perhaps we did but it was successful. I would much rather a SW type style that was consistently winning trophies and beating our nearest and dearest rivals than a free-flowing, no idea what we’re doing style we adopted last season which resulted in us being torn to pieces by Saints each time we played them and in reality we were never really serious contenders for the SL trophy.
I’m not convinced Lam has the credentials or ability to strike that balance. We have the players to do it but it’s the coach where the biggest question mark is for me.'"
Good post mate. The irony with Lam is all he claimed to improve has gone backward. We're not getting free-flow rugby; we're getting a disorganised mess.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4784 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2020 | Dec 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Itchy Arsenal="Itchy Arsenal"Maybe we have had the wrong balance? Winning trophies and reduced attendances sounds like a oxymoron to me.
Sorry to disagree but I dont in general like "impact" players. If they were any good they would be in the starting 13.
Name me half a dozen great or even really good impact players?
I know that you will name some and im sure they may be decent players but if they are that good why put them on the bench?? Will your list of impact players include any backs?
Multiple substitutions leads to athletes rather than rugby players.'"
I actually do see the advantage of 'impact players' At times the teams energy can drop if the other team is getting on the front foot or if they've seen a lot of ball. Impact players (for example Rob Burrow) added energy, speed at a time when the oppositions forwards energy is dropping. I've seen games changed with an impact player comes off the bench.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 15464 | Wigan Warriors |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Apr 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| What about other sports? I suspect there are moves from NFL, NBA and NHL which could translate, plus obviously RU
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1081 | Wigan Warriors |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Sep 2010 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2022 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Grimmy="Grimmy"What about other sports? I suspect there are moves from NFL, NBA and NHL which could translate, plus obviously RU'"
Why complicate matters when you can look back and see ready made set plays from the great teams of the 90's that would work today?
Its all about sending defenders the wrong way and at the wrong men. What worked to confuse defenders back then will mostly still work today.
This is one of the reasons i wanted the club to bring in Andy Gregory to work with our half backs. We need somebody that can think outside of todays robotic structure obsessed setup. Thats not to say throw the modern game out of the window but merge the old and new together and get the best of both worlds.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4722 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2010 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2025 | Sep 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Jukesays="Jukesays"Who says they "Need" more substitutes?
Thems just the rules
If we changed the rules to No substitutes thebplayets would adapt to that and have to pace themselves to those rules.
Simple fact is
Zero substitutions
10 substitutions
8 substitutions
Pr
6 substitutions (which is what I would go for)
Playing under any of the above the teams of today would murder the teams of yesteryear.
That's not to decry the players of yesteryear, quite the opposite, it's just tou can only be The player you were/are in the era you played in.
The players of yesteryear would have adapted etx in their own ways, and some would have made it and been a great today, some wouldn't.
And same could be said about players of today being transported back in time.
Some would adapt to the old ways, some wouldn't.
[uBut the players of today are far far bigger,[/u fitter, stronger etc etc as a whole that they were. They are also far more tactically amd technically astute as a whole than they were.
Going back and picking up recordings of moves that gregory/Edward's, Henry Paul/Connolly etc. etc did 20/30 years ago and think it would make us better now is as unrealistic as getting an Alex Murphy/Doug Laughton or whoever into coach us as they were great coaches, they were, in THEIR ERA.
Like it or not, if it were possible to physically lift the team of 1987/1995 up and drop them into today (and I am sure enforcer will tell me that if I think outside of the box then it could be possible) they would get beaten comfortably due to the advances in all the areas mentioned above.
That doesn't mean I think Tommy is a better scrum half than Greg or gildart is a better centre than gene miles or flower better than Platt. It's just the evolution of physical/tactical and technical abilities.
If the players of yesteryear had these benefits then they would undoubtedly be better than their current counterparts, but they didn't and the game has advanced so much (and not necessarily all of these are for the better).'"
I disagree
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4722 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2010 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2025 | Sep 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote 100% Warrior="100% Warrior"It is the same game in essence only and I disagree with your whole point. The game has evolved from 80’s/90’s/00’s - like all sports have. Our players are all full time (in SL and NRL anyway) which means they’re training anywhere from 6-8 times a week, possibly more. That means fitness levels will naturally increase in both cardiovascular and muscular fitness. That in its own evolved the game from a “few pints and pick of smokes after a game” to diet control and fitness control to try and ensure that when the 17 takes the field they are doing so in prime physical condition.
Moving away from fitness, the other side effect of training as often as they do is that tackle technique and offensive drills are developed into more complex and skilful aspects of the game. The tackle wrestle you rightly refer to has bits from RU and wrestling and is designed to slow down the oppositions play by controlling the ruck. Control the ruck, you control the speed of the game. Control the speed of the game and you put yourself in a position that it’s very difficult to be beaten. It may look simple but I assure you it’s far deeper that a tackle technique.
I get the yearning for yesteryear. Nostalgia is a fantastic feeling but the game has changed and moved on from 30/40yrs ago. If the sport wants to move forward globally and nationally we need to look forward, not look back constantly saying “back in my day” or words to that effect.'"
It has evolved but the skill level has decreased, that comes from grassroots and how the game has been watered down. We were full time for most of the 90's and had a massive fitness superiority to most clubs and also competed and beat full time aussie teams also. The players in the 90's has 2 subs and that was it but the forwards now with rolling subs are fitter with outside backs doing a lot of their work? Give over. Players in the 90's were bigger and maybe not as fit as a guy 2 stone lighter were fit enough to do the job. Its not looking back with nostalgia, its looking back with facts and opinions and reasons.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Captain | 13 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2018 | 6 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Apr 2021 | Mar 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I must say that last year we were in transition. We lost a lot of world class talent - including coach and back room staff. We were never going to roll on and win trophies this year. At the beginning most people were happy with mid table, and to me, I think we out performed. Next year ( hopefully) we’ll have better players in and 2020 will be the poo or bust season for Lam. That’s my thoughts anyway.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 7439 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2024 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Pieman="Pieman"It has evolved but the skill level has decreased, that comes from grassroots and how the game has been watered down. We were full time for most of the 90's and had a massive fitness superiority to most clubs and also competed and beat full time aussie teams also. The players in the 90's has 2 subs and that was it but the forwards now with rolling subs are fitter with outside backs doing a lot of their work? Give over. Players in the 90's were bigger and maybe not as fit as a guy 2 stone lighter were fit enough to do the job. Its not looking back with nostalgia, its looking back with facts and opinions and reasons.'"
But you haven’t given any facts, just a nostalgic opinion. Nor have I given any facts but an opinion and an educated one at that.
You think skill level has decreased whilst I in the contrary think it’s increased. I do believe it’s ludicrous to suggest that skill level has decreased since the 90’s. Players now are much fitter, agile and skilful than they were in the 90’s in general.
You keep labouring the point about substitutes; that’s utterly irrelevant. The game has evolved, changed. Boxing used to be 15rounds and before that unlimited rounds, does that mean the game has gone? Absolutely not.
I’m sorry but I completely disagree with everything you’ve said. The game is far more skilful now than it used to be.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4722 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2010 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2025 | Sep 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote 100% Warrior="100% Warrior"But you haven’t given any facts, just a nostalgic opinion. Nor have I given any facts but an opinion and an educated one at that.
You think skill level has decreased whilst I in the contrary think it’s increased. I do believe it’s ludicrous to suggest that skill level has decreased since the 90’s. Players now are much fitter, agile and skilful than they were in the 90’s in general.
You keep labouring the point about substitutes; that’s utterly irrelevant. The game has evolved, changed. Boxing used to be 15rounds and before that unlimited rounds, does that mean the game has gone? Absolutely not.
I’m sorry but I completely disagree with everything you’ve said. The game is far more skilful now than it used to be.'"
again I disagree, players now are clones all similar size. In the 90's they were all specialists. The skill level has decresed due to grass roots for me. You now dont play a full 13 a side and full rules until about under 13's so cant have proper positions. it used to be full rules 13 a side from under 7's. Half backs in the 90's were all more skillful than they are now. Not as big granted but more skillful. Singers werent as big but were faster and more agile. Bradford started the trend with having nearly everyone over 16 stones and its now the blueprint of the game. My point about subs is irrelevant? How many props play 80 minutes now compared to the 90's?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4784 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2020 | Dec 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Pieman="Pieman"again I disagree, players now are clones all similar size. In the 90's they were all specialists. The skill level has decresed due to grass roots for me. You now dont play a full 13 a side and full rules until about under 13's so cant have proper positions. it used to be full rules 13 a side from under 7's. Half backs in the 90's were all more skillful than they are now. Not as big granted but more skillful. Singers werent as big but were faster and more agile. Bradford started the trend with having nearly everyone over 16 stones and its now the blueprint of the game. My point about subs is irrelevant? How many props play 80 minutes now compared to the 90's?'"
The game has evolved. It learns from what works and implements it. While the games and plays of the 80s may look more skilful they're really not. In the last 10 years we've seen some amazing creative play and feats like no others from acerbating wingers diving for the corner, speedsters, and the most creative halves.
Just look at the likes of Thurston, Slater, Cronk, Inglis, Shaun Johnson, RTS and tell me they're not specialists in their positions.
|
|
|
 |
|