Prescott (22) would weaken the team compared to MoS winner Wellens.
Gibbs (25) would weaken the team compared to Gidley.
Newlove (24) would strengthen the team over Wheeler
Sullivan (27) would be incredibly ropey under any sort of high kick, which is a wingers job these days. On a par with Gardner.
Hunte (25) would strengthen the team over Meli
Hammond (21) would weaken the team compared to Pryce at 6 or Wilkin/Flannery at 13.
Martyn (24) on a par with Pryce.
Goulding (24) would weaken the team compared to Long.
Perelini (26) would weaken the team compared to the current 1st choice prop Graham (which is after all the direct comparison).
Cunningham (19) is still playing so don't see your point.
Joynt (24) would strengthen the team.

So 3 of your 11 would strengthen the side, a couple would be on a par with their 2009 counterparts, one is still playing and 5 would weaken the team.

If you were to do the opposite exercise for the whole of the 1996 17 compared to 2009, there would be a hell of a lot more than 3 that strengthened the team.

Ignoring your biase to prove a point as you are and tha 4 of your Comparisons that you say are weaker Would still get into your 1st choice 17 that means you agree that 10 out of those 11 would get a game in the current Saints team and wouldn't cause you a problem??

Are you telling me you would rather have a 32 year old Long compared to a 24 year old Goulding?
A 29 year old Wellens over a 22 year old Prescott?
A 33 year old Overseas Gidley than a 25 year old Gibbs?

You then say Perrelini would weaken the team over Graham!!!! Why Graham???? I can how you try to justify it by claimng 1st choice prop and all that but he would get into Your current Saints team end of!

Also look at the ages of them - All under 27 showing they had plenty mileage in the tank!

I'll tell you what, as Again I will stress my debate is not with the SC (Although as said previously I think it should be altered).

You show me some evidence that what we are watching today in SL is any better/closer to catching the Ausssies in terms of Quality compared to Pre Sl ie Where the National team were say 86 - 95 and then we can discuss further?

Show me the test match results and compare them, Show me the WCC results and compare them, show me something that will convince me that what I am watching is any Better than what I watched 10/15 + years ago!

Of course that should be the comparison! If not, then lets have a look the other way round, I'll even put Martyn at 6 for you and Hunte on the wing (even though Danny Arnold/Joey Hayes played most of the year on the wing)

1 S Prescott - Wellens
2 A Hunte - Hunte
3 S Gibbs - Gidley
4 P Newlove - Newlove
5 A Sullivan - Par with Meli/Gardner
6 T Martyn - Par with Pryce
7 B Goulding - Lance Todd Legend
8 A Perelini - Graham
9 K Cunningham - Same
10 A Fogerty - Cayless
11 C Joynt - Joynt
12 S Booth - Gilmour
13 K Hammond - Wilkin

14 A Northey - Flannery
15 I Pickavance - Clough
16 V Matatutia - Puletua
17 D Busby - Roby

1996: 3, Same: 3, 2009: 11.

You may disagree with a couple, but you'll be hard pressed to disagree sufficiently to conclude that the 1996 team is better than the 2009 team, and that's before even considering the quality of the back ups from the academy.

You're assuming that the Aussie game hasn't improved too.

The fact that we all reminisce misty eyed about players like Connolly who scored ONE try in his international career says it all.

And the fact that you have to Worry that he scored only 1 try in international rugby to divert away from what would be in, I would bet, Most people opinions that Connolly between 91-2002 was better than ANYTHING we have available to us now (Along with Newlove and many of the others you chose not to discuss earer) shows to me that you arent interested in DEBATE, only in proving yourself to be Right on the situation!

When in fact the truth lies somwhere between the two.

PS

Your comparisons in the 2 x teams are contrived to say the least! Considering you havent brough the ages of these players into it shows me something too!

What you are trying to do is compare a particular point in time and say that team/Player was better than it's counterpart at that particular point in time.
It doesn't work!

Your original statement (Forgive me if it wasn't you but it was a Saints fan earlier) said the 2009 team would "Muller" the 1996 team!

I still maintain that 11/12 of that 17 would get a game at Saints Now and not weaken the team (Maybe in someones opinion they may say Long was better than Goulding but in other peoples eyes maybe he wasn't?? Theres not a lot of difference IMO).

On the other hand 12/13 of todays 17 would get a game in the 96 squad and again not weaken the team etc.

One thing for sure, they wouldn't get mullered!

######################################################

Do me a favour and go back to the post about the 92 World Cup squad etc and please tell me if we have as many quality options as we did then?????

Bear in mind that in the early & middle years of SL the influx of Foregin players was far greater than what ot was Pre SL IIRC???
The Kolpac etc has had a major part to play I know but that in itself has Aided the quality of SDL that we watched whilst in reality did not help in the growth at international level which we surely are all after achieving???

Senior has been better (and undoubtedly more dangerous) in a GB shirt than Connolly IMO.



I thought we were comparing which was better, not which was younger.



Then how can you say that standards have dropped if you can't compare players from different time periods? Of course you can, especially over such a relatively short timescale.



I said the 2006 team would muller them and the 2009 team would beat them, both of which I still believe to be true. The 96 team wouldn't get out of it's own half against the 2006 pack.



I'm not saying we do. What I am saying is that any perceived decline in playing standards relevant to that period has resulted from poor junior development from the early 80s onwards (with the 6/7 year olds of 1980 making up the bulk being the pitiful team of the 2000 World Cup). This has nothing to do with SDL or the CC, it is poor junior development. In fact, I would argue that the juniors coming through and overall standard has improved since the inception of SL (1996 to today), but that standards at the inception of SL were undoubtedly poor compared to the early 1990s.

Thankfully, there appears to be some genuine young talent coming through the revitalised junior ranks of a lot of clubs (with your own Sam Tomkins labelled as the best young player since Edwards?)



Not trying to be funny mate, but I don't quite understand this point? Can you reword? If you're saying an influx of foreign players has hindered young English players I agree 100%. Thankfully this is now also being addressed by the "British trained" rule, which is a welcome development.

We can harp back to the 90s all we like but the fact of the matter is, we won nothing then either. The only way to genuinely compete with the Aussies (without bolstering the team with the best RU players) is to get the junior development nailed, and have them progressing from the academy into a genuinely intense and competitive league.

There are tentative signs that SL is becoming close enough to offer a genuione challenge to young players at the top clubs and I am optimistic that this will help breed better GB players in the medium term.

Should we have a salary cap based on Overseas players. Limit it so that British players are not counted on the cap, we could keep more players in the game this way.

Maybe a bit of selective memory there pal.

If you're talking ashes series we lost 2-1 in 97 and 2-1 in 2001 too. We lost 3-0 in 2003 but by 4, 3 and 6 points. Plus the win in Sydney. Not sure if anyone can remember any others?

2-1 was a pretty familiar result in 80s/90s everyone talks about, and there were worst whitewashes than the one in 2003 (worst Aussie team ever yadda yadda).

1 in 14 is harsh, even including the one off test farce and the recent world cup.



I agree, my argument is that we have improved since 1996 and I would take Shenton and Fox over Wellens and Naylor anyday, which I think was our centre/wing pairing in the 2000 World Cup semi final.

There is no doubt that we are less competetive with the Aussies than we were in the early 90s, but that's a different argument to standards slipping in SL, which I don't think they are.



Absolutely agree, but was it healthy to rely so heavily on RU players at international level? The marked drop since they all went back to RU suggests not. I would rather we concentrated on developing our own stars than nicking Unions.



No doubt, although I would suggest that the changes being made are steps in the right direction, but it will be 5/10 years before we see the full benefits.

Unfortunately, the rate of improvement in Australia seems to continue to outstrip our own.

So you can't remember 1996? How then do you know if SL has impoved or not since it's inception?



Not attacking the squad - just being truthful.



Actually, Hunte was the back-up centre. With Arnold on the wing.



Remind me, which division did Leigh play in from 1999 onwards?



Since your memory is conveniently fading (yet somehow you know that SL has declined since 1996???) , I suggest you go back and actually watch some matches from the 1996 season, so you can see Paul "talented young player" Anderson, Vila "top quality player" Matautia and Saints numerous other squad superstars in action.

I can remember 1996, just not the details of the lesser lights in the Saints team, which isn't unreasonable of me as a Wigan fan!

Frankly your posts and those of FTV suggest that you can't either. I'd expect you to have a firmer grip since its your team we are talking about. I'm surprised you're still advancing this line of argument.




This kind of coded reference to them being rubbish would really help us in our argument with these unreasonable Wigan fans - you won't believe this but these pie-munchers are actually claiming that the majority of our double winning squad of 1996 were good players rather than NL1 standard (I know, ridiculous isn't it!).

Yours etc

A Concerned Sintelliner'"

Yes.

I get the feeling that the pretty unprofessional Goulding would struggle to impose himself on games in a consistent way similar to the way Briers does now.

You need a far more professional attitude to succeed in SL nowadays.



Yet Senior has done far better at International level in, in your opinion, a far weaker team.

So either the teams aren't that far apart, allowing a much weaker Senior to shine more, or Senior is far better than Connolly as he's done better in a far weaker side.

Which is it? I can't see a much weaker player playing in a far weaker side being more of a success than a far stronger player in a far stronger side.