Super Duper League

Quote: Badwanger "Given that JD swapped and changed from FB to C, take your pick between Gidley, Webb, Senior or Wellens.
'"

Sorry but I'd go for Davies every time ahead of those players (especially in Davies favoured FB role, I also thought Davies was class at stand-off, don't recall him playing at centre much). Gidley would run him closest (in terms of quality as a player, I'm not saying Davies was a better centre, but that wasn't Davies' position), Webb hasn't really delivered his initial promise, Senior's past his prime but was never as good a player as Davies. As for Wellens, well you're having a laugh aren't you? More sig material.

Quote: Badwanger "That's rich. It is you who has a problem with SL!'"

I have "a problem" with the CC. Not with the merits of my own team.

Quote: Badwanger "Aye, I was there and Saints were robbed thanks to certain Mr Holdsworth gifting Wigan two points for Hunte being offside when Saints had the ball!!'"

Not quite how I remember it, but since your argument is that Saints should have won a game against one of the greatest club sides in RL history, thanks for supporting me!

Quote: Badwanger "And what will that achieve apart from you saying that Wigan player X is better than Saints player Y and me saying the opposite? When, in reality we both only saw the opposition team a small fraction of the time compared to the amount of times which we saw our own team play. So neither of us can therefore give an accurate assessment let alone an unbiased one!'"

Quote: Badwanger "What it will show is that your team was a great side in that they were capable of competing on pretty even terms with one of the all time great sides of club RL. Probably the most underrated club side in modern history.'"

Quote: Badwanger "However, having watched over 90% of the games from both those season, I can say with 100% certainty that the 2006 Saints team was a class apart from the Saints team of 1992/93. Sure, the backs were comparable (I'd still give 2006 the edge) but the 2006 forwards were immense compared to their 1992/93 counterparts.

Also, what you need to remember is that the 1992/93 season was played in Winter (which is a great leveller) and when defences were only 5m apart therefore giving the advantage to the defending team. In 2006, the game was played on faster, harder pitches with a 10m defensive line.

I'm disrespecting nothing. It was a very good Saints side but it's laughable to compare it to the team of 2006.

Or perhaps you could say that the 1992/93 season was a season where that squad over-achieved and in the following years they found their level?'"

I think the 92 backs WERE stronger. You're right about the forwards. I don't think its "laughable" to compare the two teams. It probably was a better side overall though than the 92 side but I can't understand why you can't accept a compliment about your 92 side, I am a Wigan fan telling you that was a great side. Its bizarre. The fact you think its worthy of sig status is amusing. As is the fact that you include my reference to the 2009 side (a good team, it may be running away with the SDL but that's more down to the mediocrity of the opposition than the current Saints team being exceptional - come on, be honest, admit it!

).

Getting back to the 2006 side, I do think the Saints 2006 side is a little overrated. If the star players in your side, the ones that look like your best players, include players of limited phsyical gifts like Wellens - though 100% effort and great positional sense, I'm not saying he isn't good, simply that he isn't great - then you can't really claim that the 2006 side is up there with say Wigan from the early-mid 90s, the great Aussie teams like Canberra in the days of Meninga, Daley, Clyde et al or the great Brisbane sides of the 90s.