oh dear,

most people on here will of only really watched longy play, and 12 years at that.

murphy its what people have told us, the end of his playing the odd classic from the day.

you wouldnt say either answer was wrong...would ya??

Yes I would.

Only because you were old enough to have seen both. I've seen old footage and the players are all fat, 5 foot tall and really, really slow.

If you put a modern day Greg Inglis against the best team in the world from the time Murphy was playing, do you think they'd even get a finger on him?

If you can get a copy of the 1962 GB tour to Australia.

GBs back line was Round, Boston, Ashton, Fox, Sullivan, Bolton & Murphy.
Huddart, McTigue, Edgar etc in the forwards.

No fat five footers in there.

I accept it's a different game, but class is class. They would have been great players in any era.

Compare that back line to what we sent to the World Cup last year, not one of last year backs would get near to the 1962 side.

If they did he probably wouldn't get up again thats how they played it then!!

As for unfit and slow tell that to Vinty while he was running back to Widnes after training!!!!!

And the strength of that 1962 side meant that likes of Vinty, Stopford, Southward, Davies Carlton etc didn't get in.

in 1962, Sean Long would have been playing prop rather than scrum half.

It's almost impossible to compare players of different eras in terms of 'who was the better player?'

Who would win in a race between Carl Lewis and Usain Bolt? Stats say Bolt would obliterate Lewis but if the American had all the advantages in technology and training Bolt has had it may be a lot closer.

Both Long and Murphy will be remembered as great players. There's no point arguing over who was best.

Why, were the prop forwards faster in those days?

murphy proved it at international level,end of