Ojlovednicole
Juniors
- Messages
- 374
At the moment fate has crossed paths to set up the platform to display the strongest talent it has ever seen on the park. The strong dollar/salary cap has allowed the NRL to pilfer talent from England, the Islands, nz and even France! A luxury not given in the 00's where the rugby union lure and strong English pound took half the top talent and spatterings of mid level NRL talent with no englishmen in sight in return. Morley aside, we had no Burgess, graham, Ellis and cooper to trade off what the NRL lost back then.
Couple this with the new age professionalism and sports medicine and fitness levels unprecedented, why are we not seeing the best rugby league we have ever seen?
The mid 00s and mid 90s to me, and generally speaking , appear to have been the most exciting. Wh can forget Benji in the '05 grand final? Or the mercurial footwork of Rod Silva, Mullins and Steve renouf or the ball work of Johns/Stuart/langer? Why is this?
I have some theories;
-shoulder charge was present.
-big units intermingling with smaller whippets created a visual feast.
-coaching evolution. Structure over excitement.
-strength over speed.
-Pacific Islanders. No offence at all but these guys are strong and they hit hard, but their game play isn't fleet of foot or 'excitement footy'. Maybe it's not a Pacific Islander thing so much as a pure battering ram showcase.
Either way the game has never been more criticised on the field. It was traditionally seen as quality on the field with off field bogan behaviour the games downfall.
Not so now.
A side point from this observation is the game quality doesn't necessarily suffer with diluted talent. It can open things up with the wider canyon of talent on display.
Couple this with the new age professionalism and sports medicine and fitness levels unprecedented, why are we not seeing the best rugby league we have ever seen?
The mid 00s and mid 90s to me, and generally speaking , appear to have been the most exciting. Wh can forget Benji in the '05 grand final? Or the mercurial footwork of Rod Silva, Mullins and Steve renouf or the ball work of Johns/Stuart/langer? Why is this?
I have some theories;
-shoulder charge was present.
-big units intermingling with smaller whippets created a visual feast.
-coaching evolution. Structure over excitement.
-strength over speed.
-Pacific Islanders. No offence at all but these guys are strong and they hit hard, but their game play isn't fleet of foot or 'excitement footy'. Maybe it's not a Pacific Islander thing so much as a pure battering ram showcase.
Either way the game has never been more criticised on the field. It was traditionally seen as quality on the field with off field bogan behaviour the games downfall.
Not so now.
A side point from this observation is the game quality doesn't necessarily suffer with diluted talent. It can open things up with the wider canyon of talent on display.
Last edited: