I think if you're talking about the legends of yesteryear the key thing is whether they physically had the stature and basic pace to play in the modern era. Skills clearly aren't an issue - someone with Murphy's skills would be a skilful player in any era.

I think if you are talking forwards say from the 20s or 30s most of them weren't tall enough or big enough framed to allow them to develop the physique needed to handle the physicality of modern RL (tthe players of that era were at least as hard as the forwards playing SL today, they just wouldn't be big enough and couldn't be even if they had modern gyms and nutrition).

The unfortunate comment about Boston in my signature is so laughable because given modern fitness methods (which we don't seem to have at the moment at Wigan ) I have absolutely no doubt that the prodigious physical gifts of Boston would allow him to shine in the modern era. Would he have been as good as Offiah as a winger? Could he have been an international class strike centre maybe? We'll never know the answers to these questions but its ludicrous to suggest that he wouldn't have been any good in the modern era.

How can BK forget something which didn't happen?

Instead of the usual over-simplification and urban myth propaganda of the pro-SC brigade, try reading the multitude of threads where the massive overspend on the new stand - redeveloping the ground, that was never on Stains agenda but Wigan were trying their best -and the lowest gate prices in Div One - a misguided but benevolent policy by a club that has always been for the people, which is why our crowds are so much better than yours - are identified as the key reasons Wigan got so heavily into debt.

Now come come. Surely nothing can touch your "Noble must be had up for Fraud" gem.

That will NEVER be beaten.

Not even by the train of thought that generated something along the lines of...i never saw him play but he was not as good as Johns...(would quote it directly but i am not that sad to spend my time looking back over the dross you sometimes type.

Mate that was a turn of phrase, stop trying to deflect from a thread that has made you look very silly indeed.

I cannot believe you have become that obsessed with me you have added it to your sig!

You really need to get out more!

If you think Wigan's financial troubles were all down to that stand, well . . . .

And re: your ticket sales point - that's a nice way of spinning "we were spending a lot more than we were getting in".

I think if you look at what makes a good RL player:

Talent
Skill
Size
Strength
Fitness
Speed
Determination/dedication



Probably missed some off but that should do for a start.


The first one you are born with. As a working assumption let's assume players of 30 years ago and current players are equal.

Skill- skills have improved in todays game - forwards offload more and generally have more in their lockers than those of yesteryear. Backs - debatable- call it a tie

Size - There were 13stone forwards around back then. Go figure. Todays players are much bigger

Strength- men against boys. Our under 21's are probably stronger on average than the pre-Fairburn team.

Fitness- Not even worth mentioning. Suffice to say a game of touch rugby then 4 pints of Guiness is no longer the training schedule.

Speed - overall faster, but there were a few flyers back then. Call it a draw to avoid arguments.

Determinatoin/Dedicaton - Hard to evaluate. Gong for a draw here too.



However, one thing that is overlooked is technology. Today if there is a weakness in a players game, you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be exposed.


Most if not all serious games are recorded and video analysis of plays and players is a key part of training.

Therefore any "flaws" in a players game are constantly identified and acted upon.

The key effect of this is to improve the player.

Another couple of players to mention that I would love to have seen in a Saints shirt

Dean Bell and Paul Hulme - 2 great, hard but fair players.

Can you seriously not understand the concept.

You claim Johns to be better than Murphy, so in 20 years does Johns become a poorer player because he played in the 90's/00's?!

You can spout off to try to justify this strange stance but talent and ability are timeless.

Props like Beetson were ballhandling forwards like nothing we have these days he may not have been as fit in a direct comparisson but in relation to the game when he played it you could argue he is fitter than most current Props as he did 80 week in week out.

You cannot pass on opinion on someone you by your own confession did not see play and then criticise those who saw both players play for having a far more informed and accurate view on the issue, its ok to be wrong Brett sometimes, its even better to put your hand up when you have spouted nonsense rather than digging the hole deeper.

You just don't get it do you?

What Would the players of yesteryear done with the advantages of the things you mention above?

Who was the Best Heavyweight Champ Joe Louis, Muhammed Ali or Vitali Klitschko?

We are talking about a player and what he did and the way he dit in the generation he played in! Alex Murphy was Argubly the best player in the World of His generation so wa Johns!

What are you going to say in 25/35 years time when theres a Robotic Scrum half walking around at 7"10, 20 stone and can run the 100 mtrs in 6.2 seconds?
Are you going to tell me then that Johns was Crap?

How is it your so depressed about watching Wigan these days when EVERY player is better than it's counterpart from say 1985/90?????

Your on about strength and size! Try telling that to Dick Huddart/Rocky Turner/McTigue

There are better ball players in the Forwards! Unbelievable, Bill Ashurst/Mal Reilly/Steve Norton/John Whitely I can name hundreds of Ball playung forwards!
But not as good as Sinfield/JJB/Purdham/langley/Wilkin and the rest of that shower of S h1te I paid the hefty price to go watching down under last year!

I admire and agree with quite a lot of what you say about the Salary Cap, On thsio your a million miles away from being right!

Some of those 14 stone forwards, John Barton, Brian Edgar etc were 17 stone plus.
They were fit as the majority had physical manual day jobs. Some of the tales about John Barton, Brian McTigue and Frank Collier strength whilst working down the pit were unreal, but true as they came from people who worked with them (I'm sure twosevenzero and Jukesays will know what I'm on about)

Dick Huddart was as big and faster then any back row forward playing today.

To dismiss players of the quality I have mentioned on before is ludicrous, particularly as you admit to never have seen them play.