Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 55

Thread: The Modern Game

  1. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    To be honest I don't mind the current leeway defenders get now. There was nothing that got on my wick more than:
    A.) Attackers being allowed to surrender in a tackle and sneak a quick PTB because defenders were forced to roll awaty.
    B.) Someone being dominated in a tackle and the defenders again being compelled to get up far too quickly.

    In both situations the attacking players have'nt earned any right whatsoever for a quick PTB. In the early stages of super league the likes of bog average players like Anthony Gibbons at Leeds were looking like world beaters because they could do the uber-boring scoot from dummy half.

    It all made the game fast and, IMO at least, exciting. Scoots from dummy half were only done perhaps half a dozen to a dozen times a game, and they rarely led to the DH running through to just score. More, it was then that a team prepared and ready to take advantage of the subsequent disarray in the opposition defence could then put on an attacking move to score.

    Our own Vila Matautia was great at getting the quick PTB. That time he dove at the legs of the piescum player and nobbled him The six-fingered freaks in the stands of the borrowed ground were going apeshit.

  2. #27
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,647
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    I think it’s the old “it was better in my day”. I used to go to Thatto Heath Labour club as a kid and being a Saints obsessed kid, I’d have a Saints shirt on and would listen to my grandad and his mates saying “it was better in our day”. This was when we in the early years of Super League and successful. Fast forward to now, my Dad’s doing the same and seemingly, people here are too.
    St Helens Rugby League Football Club

  3. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dos Cervezas View Post
    I think it’s the old “it was better in my day”.
    That sort of comment is pretty insulting to people who've taken time to detail specific problems. It also ignores that casual watchers now find the game dull. I usually welcome your posts, but that one is rubbish.

    I've watched Saints since 1984 and think the first decade of SL was the era where the game was most exciting, as full time players with better training and conditioning, playing on firm surfaces in milder weather, made a great entertainment spectacle.

    I care about the game and my club, and want it to be the best it can be. Sadly, at the moment, it's a bore-a-thon grindfest.

  4. #29
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk fishy3005's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    12,154
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    That sort of comment is pretty insulting to people
    This is the funniest thing ive read in quite some time. You win the internets today, Webbo
    screaming in the family corner, scaring the kiddies

  5. #30
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,647
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    That sort of comment is pretty insulting to people who've taken time to detail specific problems. It also ignores that casual watchers now find the game dull. I usually welcome your posts, but that one is rubbish.

    I've watched Saints since 1984 and think the first decade of SL was the era where the game was most exciting, as full time players with better training and conditioning, playing on firm surfaces in milder weather, made a great entertainment spectacle.

    I care about the game and my club, and want it to be the best it can be. Sadly, at the moment, it's a bore-a-thon grindfest.
    It’s how people are. I think this is the case again. The game has evolved. Thats happened across the eras and decades and will continue to happen again in future. It’s happened in football, the other sport I like and I am told the same in Rugby Union, too. It’s rather natural, actually. This leads to “it was better in my day” type comments. Was football better in the 70’s when pitches were a pudding and blokes were half cut playing? I suppose if you grew up then, you’d probably look back with some rose tinted specs. It doesn’t mean it’s correct.

    People are naturally averse to change. It’s fairly common and I think this is the case with Rugby League. At its best, Rugby League is exciting and enthralling. At its “worst”, its pretty poor but that’s always been the case and will always be the case. There’s plenty of exciting play and obscene skill on offer to this day in Super League. As there was 10 years ago and as there was 20 years. It may slightly differ from those timeframes but it’s certainly still there. I find it the “rose tinted glasses” argument, “it was better in my day” and insert a select number of years.

    I always find it hard to quantify how good a particular team or era is when eras and teams change so dramatically. While the 1996-2005 sides were excellent attacking sides, the sides of 2006 and more recently 2017-present sides are far better defensively and comparing the two is harsh. Rugby League fans are generally negative, too, and are more than happy to slate anything and anyone related to the sport and this is the same. I can’t remember there being many shouts about how poor Rugby League was after the Grand Final, it was an arm wrestle, a thoroughly exciting one at that. Maybe people are just negative when it suits.
    St Helens Rugby League Football Club

  6. #31
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,522
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dos Cervezas View Post
    It’s how people are. I think this is the case again. The game has evolved. Thats happened across the eras and decades and will continue to happen again in future. It’s happened in football, the other sport I like and I am told the same in Rugby Union, too. It’s rather natural, actually. This leads to “it was better in my day” type comments. Was football better in the 70’s when pitches were a pudding and blokes were half cut playing? I suppose if you grew up then, you’d probably look back with some rose tinted specs. It doesn’t mean it’s correct.

    People are naturally averse to change. It’s fairly common and I think this is the case with Rugby League. At its best, Rugby League is exciting and enthralling. At its “worst”, its pretty poor but that’s always been the case and will always be the case. There’s plenty of exciting play and obscene skill on offer to this day in Super League. As there was 10 years ago and as there was 20 years. It may slightly differ from those timeframes but it’s certainly still there. I find it the “rose tinted glasses” argument, “it was better in my day” and insert a select number of years.

    I always find it hard to quantify how good a particular team or era is when eras and teams change so dramatically. While the 1996-2005 sides were excellent attacking sides, the sides of 2006 and more recently 2017-present sides are far better defensively and comparing the two is harsh. Rugby League fans are generally negative, too, and are more than happy to slate anything and anyone related to the sport and this is the same. I can’t remember there being many shouts about how poor Rugby League was after the Grand Final, it was an arm wrestle, a thoroughly exciting one at that. Maybe people are just negative when it suits.
    That bit is pretty much it in a nutshell,in my time watching saints from the mid '80's i have been entertained and bored in probably equal measure. It becomes more obvious now though when people are bored as phones come out and more time is spent texting ect than watching the game.

  7. #32
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,427
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dos Cervezas View Post
    I can’t remember there being many shouts about how poor Rugby League was after the Grand Final, it was an arm wrestle, a thoroughly exciting one at that. Maybe people are just negative when it suits.
    I'm not sure that's fair. I think the general euphoria of winning the game (and how we won it) dominated the weekend immediately after the game on here, but there were plenty who left it a few days then spent the following week critiquing the game as a spectacle and being critical of how we played to Wigan's style of RL that night. I found that game to be dull as a spectacle but it had all the drama and big time consequences to keep me hooked because my team was in it, but had that been Leeds v Hull in the GF I'd have been calling it the worst GF in years. And there is also a time and place to discuss tactics, and immediately after winning the league wasn't the time as it would have come across as overly negative and ••••ing on everyone's chips, but in the days and weeks after it I think plenty on here raised it.

  8. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    5,346
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dos Cervezas View Post
    It’s how people are. I think this is the case again. The game has evolved. Thats happened across the eras and decades and will continue to happen again in future. It’s happened in football, the other sport I like and I am told the same in Rugby Union, too. It’s rather natural, actually. This leads to “it was better in my day” type comments. Was football better in the 70’s when pitches were a pudding and blokes were half cut playing? I suppose if you grew up then, you’d probably look back with some rose tinted specs. It doesn’t mean it’s correct.

    People are naturally averse to change. It’s fairly common and I think this is the case with Rugby League. At its best, Rugby League is exciting and enthralling. At its “worst”, its pretty poor but that’s always been the case and will always be the case. There’s plenty of exciting play and obscene skill on offer to this day in Super League. As there was 10 years ago and as there was 20 years. It may slightly differ from those timeframes but it’s certainly still there. I find it the “rose tinted glasses” argument, “it was better in my day” and insert a select number of years.

    I always find it hard to quantify how good a particular team or era is when eras and teams change so dramatically. While the 1996-2005 sides were excellent attacking sides, the sides of 2006 and more recently 2017-present sides are far better defensively and comparing the two is harsh. Rugby League fans are generally negative, too, and are more than happy to slate anything and anyone related to the sport and this is the same. I can’t remember there being many shouts about how poor Rugby League was after the Grand Final, it was an arm wrestle, a thoroughly exciting one at that. Maybe people are just negative when it suits.
    Sorry that's pure sentimentalism; there isn't any sort of argument to back that up other than how you feel which is basically no argument at all. Webbo and Gray are both right in what they've put forward and explained it with some semblance of logic that doesn't rely on feeling alone.

  9. #34
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk fishy3005's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    12,154
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    I don’t mind high scoring games. Some low scoring games can be gripping. Whats bugged me the past few weeks is that i honestly feel we are capable of far better than what we are serving up. People defend the team talking all this about solid defence and playing the percentages really well. I can understand all that but its simply not entertaining and its nothing like i grew up watching. This past 2 games ive found myself playing on my phone more than watching the tv and Im chuffed that i haven’t paid to get in the ground to watch it!! No way am i paying to see 4 drives then a kick down field from Roby on the 4th tackle. Sod that.

    I don’t mind a bit of grind rugby when its needed in close games against teams of similar ability to ours, but we should have put 50 on Leeds, and 50 on Rovers the week before. Leeds sucked us into a slugfest and we fell for it. We had to because we sure as sh** couldn’t open them up with some open rugby.

    We are deserved Chamipons, im trying not to take anything away from the players, but we came within a whisker of losing that final. We had enough possession in the first half to win 2 grand finals but couldn’t create any real chances. Its like under Cunningham in 2015. Two semi finals that year against Leeds and we lost playing percentages rugby because instead of going out to win the games we went out trying not to lose the games. Last years final could have so easily ended in the same manner. The players will only buy into this style of rugby as long as we continue to win. If a time comes when we lose a big game playing this grind style rugby they will soon get fed up.

    Going back to the original topic of rugby league in general. Is it generally duller than it used to be? Yep. Does it HAVE to be that way? No. Ive watched some entertaining games on SKY this year, they just don’t involve us. We are masters of boring rugby at the minute and that is sad to see because at one time (win, lose or draw) we always played nice rugby.
    screaming in the family corner, scaring the kiddies

  10. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dos Cervezas View Post
    It’s how people are. I think this is the case again. The game has evolved. Thats happened across the eras and decades and will continue to happen again in future. It’s happened in football, the other sport I like and I am told the same in Rugby Union, too. It’s rather natural, actually. This leads to “it was better in my day” type comments. Was football better in the 70’s when pitches were a pudding and blokes were half cut playing? I suppose if you grew up then, you’d probably look back with some rose tinted specs. It doesn’t mean it’s correct.

    People are naturally averse to change. It’s fairly common and I think this is the case with Rugby League. At its best, Rugby League is exciting and enthralling. At its “worst”, its pretty poor but that’s always been the case and will always be the case. There’s plenty of exciting play and obscene skill on offer to this day in Super League. As there was 10 years ago and as there was 20 years. It may slightly differ from those timeframes but it’s certainly still there. I find it the “rose tinted glasses” argument, “it was better in my day” and insert a select number of years.

    I always find it hard to quantify how good a particular team or era is when eras and teams change so dramatically. While the 1996-2005 sides were excellent attacking sides, the sides of 2006 and more recently 2017-present sides are far better defensively and comparing the two is harsh. Rugby League fans are generally negative, too, and are more than happy to slate anything and anyone related to the sport and this is the same. I can’t remember there being many shouts about how poor Rugby League was after the Grand Final, it was an arm wrestle, a thoroughly exciting one at that. Maybe people are just negative when it suits.

    Again... I did explain that before the first decade of the summer rugby era, I'd been watching Saints/RL for 12 years. Those were the times I was growing up, and I think the rugby in that 1996-2006 period was a superior entertainment spectacle to what went before it - and very much better than what came after. I'm being objective, and it's frustrating for it to be inferred that I'm just being nostalgic.

    Similarly, there's people who've for longer than me saying the same things.

    If you think the game is better and more entertaining now, then make a case, instead of casually dismissing the comments of others as not worth bothering to consider.

  11. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishy3005 View Post
    This is the funniest thing ive read in quite some time. You win the internets today, Webbo

  12. #37
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newport, Shropshire
    Posts
    2,856
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishy3005 View Post
    I don’t mind high scoring games. Some low scoring games can be gripping. Whats bugged me the past few weeks is that i honestly feel we are capable of far better than what we are serving up. People defend the team talking all this about solid defence and playing the percentages really well. I can understand all that but its simply not entertaining and its nothing like i grew up watching. This past 2 games ive found myself playing on my phone more than watching the tv and Im chuffed that i haven’t paid to get in the ground to watch it!! No way am i paying to see 4 drives then a kick down field from Roby on the 4th tackle. Sod that.

    I don’t mind a bit of grind rugby when its needed in close games against teams of similar ability to ours, but we should have put 50 on Leeds, and 50 on Rovers the week before. Leeds sucked us into a slugfest and we fell for it. We had to because we sure as sh** couldn’t open them up with some open rugby.

    We are deserved Chamipons, im trying not to take anything away from the players, but we came within a whisker of losing that final. We had enough possession in the first half to win 2 grand finals but couldn’t create any real chances. Its like under Cunningham in 2015. Two semi finals that year against Leeds and we lost playing percentages rugby because instead of going out to win the games we went out trying not to lose the games. Last years final could have so easily ended in the same manner. The players will only buy into this style of rugby as long as we continue to win. If a time comes when we lose a big game playing this grind style rugby they will soon get fed up.

    Going back to the original topic of rugby league in general. Is it generally duller than it used to be? Yep. Does it HAVE to be that way? No. Ive watched some entertaining games on SKY this year, they just don’t involve us. We are masters of boring rugby at the minute and that is sad to see because at one time (win, lose or draw) we always played nice rugby.
    You’ve summed up the way I feel at the moment. I’m pleased we beat Leeds but I didn’t enjoy the way we beat them. I think we are a lot better than our performances suggest. It would be good if we could go out and play against Wakefield.

    I enjoyed the Grand Final (my heart didn’t) but I wouldn’t have enjoyed it as much if I hadn’t had an emotional interest in the outcome. Anyway sorry for interfering with the flow of the debate. There are some really interesting points being made.

  13. #38
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk fishy3005's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    12,154
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suttoner View Post
    You’ve summed up the way I feel at the moment. I’m pleased we beat Leeds but I didn’t enjoy the way we beat them. I think we are a lot better than our performances suggest. It would be good if we could go out and play against Wakefield.

    I enjoyed the Grand Final (my heart didn’t) but I wouldn’t have enjoyed it as much if I hadn’t had an emotional interest in the outcome. Anyway sorry for interfering with the flow of the debate. There are some really interesting points being made.
    Yeh i derailed the thread a bit making it more about Saints than the game in general
    Last edited by fishy3005; 12th April 2021 at 16:39.
    screaming in the family corner, scaring the kiddies

  14. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Suttoner/Fishy - it's about both Saints and the wider game, though innit? What you both say are perfectly valid and interesting. Unfortunately, we're one of the worst in terms of one-dimensional rugby. As others have said, we have some of the best attacking players, and they've been able to come up with individual pieces of quality to help us score, but won't always be able to.

    But we're just a symptom of the way the game's gone anyway. Even if we wanted to play a more expansive game, the rules allow the spoiling tactics that come from the defence having far too long to complete then clear the tackle.

  15. #40
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    2,287
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishy3005 View Post
    I don’t mind high scoring games. Some low scoring games can be gripping. Whats bugged me the past few weeks is that i honestly feel we are capable of far better than what we are serving up. People defend the team talking all this about solid defence and playing the percentages really well. I can understand all that but its simply not entertaining and its nothing like i grew up watching. This past 2 games ive found myself playing on my phone more than watching the tv and Im chuffed that i haven’t paid to get in the ground to watch it!! No way am i paying to see 4 drives then a kick down field from Roby on the 4th tackle. Sod that.

    I don’t mind a bit of grind rugby when its needed in close games against teams of similar ability to ours, but we should have put 50 on Leeds, and 50 on Rovers the week before. Leeds sucked us into a slugfest and we fell for it. We had to because we sure as sh** couldn’t open them up with some open rugby.

    We are deserved Chamipons, im trying not to take anything away from the players, but we came within a whisker of losing that final. We had enough possession in the first half to win 2 grand finals but couldn’t create any real chances. Its like under Cunningham in 2015. Two semi finals that year against Leeds and we lost playing percentages rugby because instead of going out to win the games we went out trying not to lose the games. Last years final could have so easily ended in the same manner. The players will only buy into this style of rugby as long as we continue to win. If a time comes when we lose a big game playing this grind style rugby they will soon get fed up.

    Going back to the original topic of rugby league in general. Is it generally duller than it used to be? Yep. Does it HAVE to be that way? No. Ive watched some entertaining games on SKY this year, they just don’t involve us. We are masters of boring rugby at the minute and that is sad to see because at one time (win, lose or draw) we always played nice rugby.
    Well said. I’m not going to pay to watch this very often. I will be more entertained by Netflix

  16. #41
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk fishy3005's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    12,154
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    Suttoner/Fishy - it's about both Saints and the wider game, though innit? What you both say are perfectly valid and interesting. Unfortunately, we're one of the worst in terms of one-dimensional rugby. As others have said, we have some of the best attacking players, and they've been able to come up with individual pieces of quality to help us score, but won't always be able to.

    But we're just a symptom of the way the game's gone anyway. Even if we wanted to play a more expansive game, the rules allow the spoiling tactics that come from the defence having far too long to complete then clear the tackle.
    Yeh its sad but it is the way things have gone over time. Daniel Anderson was all about defence but we still scored some nice tries with the class individuals we had. IMO the biggest culprits of what we see today are Michael McGuire when he was at Wigan and Nathan Brown at Huddersfield. They brought over the whole gang tackle, wrestling, niggling tactics and eventually it became the norm. British rugby league has sort of lost its identity over the past 10 years.
    screaming in the family corner, scaring the kiddies

  17. #42
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,427
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    Again... I did explain that before the first decade of the summer rugby era, I'd been watching Saints/RL for 12 years. Those were the times I was growing up, and I think the rugby in that 1996-2006 period was a superior entertainment spectacle to what went before it - and very much better than what came after. I'm being objective, and it's frustrating for it to be inferred that I'm just being nostalgic.
    You're pretty much my age and started going the games at the same time. My nostalgic era when I fell in love with the game was 85-93ish when I was a kid and then a teenager, standing on the Scaff even though I was only a kid, all those big derbies with Wigan, the Semi Finals with Widnes, the one with Wigan at OT, Wembley heartbreak and celebrating a JPS and a Lancashire Cup. Those years will always be my favourite years, my years so to speak, but I'd never say the quality of RL offered up was better then than it was in the first stages of the Super League era. That era was the best because it took the creativity of the previous decade but professionalised it, polished it up a bit, gave the players better conditioning and allowed them to turn it all up a notch but with that old school attitude still in tact to some degree. 96-05 was the best decade for me watching Saints and RL in general even though I'll always say 85-95 was 'my decade'. I can still differentiate and know which was an overall better product on the field.

  18. #43
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,647
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    Again... I did explain that before the first decade of the summer rugby era, I'd been watching Saints/RL for 12 years. Those were the times I was growing up, and I think the rugby in that 1996-2006 period was a superior entertainment spectacle to what went before it - and very much better than what came after. I'm being objective, and it's frustrating for it to be inferred that I'm just being nostalgic.

    Similarly, there's people who've for longer than me saying the same things.

    If you think the game is better and more entertaining now, then make a case, instead of casually dismissing the comments of others as not worth bothering to consider.
    I’m not saying any era is better than another. They’re all different in various ways and continue to offer immense quality and some pretty poor stuff, in equal measure. I can understand the game has evolved and will continue to do so, some things for the betterment of Rugby League and others less so.

    However, it’s largely true that nostalgia clouds views. I’ve sat and stood next to all many of people over the past 25 or so years and at different points, I’ve listened to all many of people complain and say their particular era was better than what was on offer at that current point or complain about things that wouldn’t have happened x years ago. It’s something that will continue as well. These type of comments and threads are not really for me, I can appreciate different things at different times, I’m certain the use of Vila Matautia these days would have a completely different affect on a game now than it did twenty years ago, for example, and I find it’s rose tinted glasses stuff, really. I’m not knocking anyone’s opinion, it’s up to them but swipes at the game don’t particularly sit right with me, especially when we’ve been graced with the likes of Barba, Taia, Lomax, Roby, Coote, Grace, Makinson, Percival etc over the past few years, who have offered up some sublime talent.
    St Helens Rugby League Football Club

  19. #44
    Learning All The Songs Kakariki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,849
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dos Cervezas View Post
    I’m not saying any era is better than another. They’re all different in various ways and continue to offer immense quality and some pretty poor stuff, in equal measure. I can understand the game has evolved and will continue to do so, some things for the betterment of Rugby League and others less so.

    However, it’s largely true that nostalgia clouds views. I’ve sat and stood next to all many of people over the past 25 or so years and at different points, I’ve listened to all many of people complain and say their particular era was better than what was on offer at that current point or complain about things that wouldn’t have happened x years ago. It’s something that will continue as well. These type of comments and threads are not really for me, I can appreciate different things at different times, I’m certain the use of Vila Matautia these days would have a completely different affect on a game now than it did twenty years ago, for example, and I find it’s rose tinted glasses stuff, really. I’m not knocking anyone’s opinion, it’s up to them but swipes at the game don’t particularly sit right with me, especially when we’ve been graced with the likes of Barba, Taia, Lomax, Roby, Coote, Grace, Makinson, Percival etc over the past few years, who have offered up some sublime talent.
    Of the players you mention, yes, Barba and Grace have been outstanding in broken play. The rest are stand out players in the modern game playing within a very rigid structure. There are very few true jaw-dropping moments of pure skill I can recall from the other players mentioned, other than Tommy Mak's trademark flying tries which are more the results of a rule change. I recall far more from Long et al.

    This is not a criticism of our current team, more that the modern game doesn't lend itself to off-the-cuff brilliance. Not the players fault, just the way teams now strive to be error free rather than the "we're gonna score one more than you" attitude Saints seemed to play with between 85 and 2005.

    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

  20. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    You're pretty much my age and started going the games at the same time. My nostalgic era when I fell in love with the game was 85-93ish when I was a kid and then a teenager, standing on the Scaff even though I was only a kid, all those big derbies with Wigan, the Semi Finals with Widnes, the one with Wigan at OT, Wembley heartbreak and celebrating a JPS and a Lancashire Cup. Those years will always be my favourite years, my years so to speak, but I'd never say the quality of RL offered up was better then than it was in the first stages of the Super League era. That era was the best because it took the creativity of the previous decade but professionalised it, polished it up a bit, gave the players better conditioning and allowed them to turn it all up a notch but with that old school attitude still in tact to some degree. 96-05 was the best decade for me watching Saints and RL in general even though I'll always say 85-95 was 'my decade'. I can still differentiate and know which was an overall better product on the field.
    Yeah, that pretty much matches me and my thoughts/memories.

    As well as the SL era polishing the game and full time professionalism allowing better training/conditioning, we were playing on firmer ground in milder weather.

    There also seemed to be a buzz about the game, a confidence, a swagger. A sense the sport was on an upward trajectory.

  21. #46
    Noooobie
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    24
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Love this discussion. Yes my team is our team. Are we any different than most of super league? No. Teams are coached not to lose and by and large no blow away scores occur these days.
    Error free gameplay is the norm now and off the cuff stuff isn't the norm.
    Saints (and many other teams) still have the players to grace (no pun!) any era but apart from rare brilliance set plays are the norm.
    Johnny Lomax for me defies the set play at times - his cutout passes to our wingers sum up what he can do.
    But our gameplan is often two drives by wingers or centres, then two front row drives followed by drop-off to second row then kick on the last to build pressure.
    We aren't that different to other teams - the modern game as I call it.
    Purists may love it but new potential fans i doubt.

  22. #47
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,184
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    The tactics we played against Leeds we would have been better with Batchelor and Rizelli in the centres, then we could haave really kept it tight. I'm hoping such a disjointd performance was a one off through the cup and Leeds team selection. We really do have the 3/4s to open up any other SL team but none of them ever seem to get the ball with half a gap unless it it is from a Lomax cut out pass. I'm sure that we can play a structured defence, but give our players a bit more freedom in attack. I'd love to go back to the days of ball playing loose forwards.

  23. #48
    Learning All The Songs Kakariki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,849
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guardianreader View Post
    Love this discussion. Yes my team is our team. Are we any different than most of super league? No. Teams are coached not to lose and by and large no blow away scores occur these days.
    Error free gameplay is the norm now and off the cuff stuff isn't the norm.
    Saints (and many other teams) still have the players to grace (no pun!) any era but apart from rare brilliance set plays are the norm.
    Johnny Lomax for me defies the set play at times - his cutout passes to our wingers sum up what he can do.
    But our gameplan is often two drives by wingers or centres, then two front row drives followed by drop-off to second row then kick on the last to build pressure.
    We aren't that different to other teams - the modern game as I call it.
    Purists may love it but new potential fans i doubt.
    Spot on.

    A perfect example was on Saturday when Tommy Mak tried to take his winger on the outside, only to put a foot in touch. It was an exciting piece of play that didn't quite come off. It was the only time in the entire game that I stood up from the settee. However, in the commentary, rather than praising the effort, Brian Noble said with his coach's hat on he wouldn't be happy with that.

    This sums up the current attitude of most coaches.


    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

  24. #49
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newport, Shropshire
    Posts
    2,856
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kakariki View Post
    Spot on.

    A perfect example was on Saturday when Tommy Mak tried to take his winger on the outside, only to put a foot in touch. It was an exciting piece of play that didn't quite come off. It was the only time in the entire game that I stood up from the settee. However, in the commentary, rather than praising the effort, Brian Noble said with his coach's hat on he wouldn't be happy with that.

    This sums up the current attitude of most coaches.


    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
    Brian Noble was the one bashing out the old mantra that you have to earn the right to play by dominance in the forwards. In general that might be right but is it right playing against a team devoid of backs and with forwards playing in the three quarter line when you are two forwards down because of an ankle injury and a head injury assessment? It seems to me that when you have dominance in the backs you should change tack and exploit it more; play to your strengths on the day.

    That Makinson break was good. As a spectator, I’d love to see more action like that.

  25. #50
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk The Wee Waa Womble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Harrogate
    Age
    33
    Posts
    7,965
    Rep Power
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kakariki View Post
    Spot on.

    A perfect example was on Saturday when Tommy Mak tried to take his winger on the outside, only to put a foot in touch. It was an exciting piece of play that didn't quite come off. It was the only time in the entire game that I stood up from the settee. However, in the commentary, rather than praising the effort, Brian Noble said with his coach's hat on he wouldn't be happy with that.

    This sums up the current attitude of most coaches.


    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
    Wanted to hoy the remote through the TV every time Noble opened his mouth. Makes Brian Moore sound cheerful. Makinson was half a boots width away from an exhilarating try and it’s not like he turned over possession far from the opponents line as it was. As you said, those kinds of plays get fans on their feet at home and in the stadium, they should be encouraged.
    Forwards win games. The backs decide by how much.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •