Was the game more interesting to watch in the 80 and 90s then now?

[Bobby DIGital]

..Oh and I also hate split halves and edge combinations.

...oh and block plays.

 

[Springs]

2005 was by far my favourite season, despite the heartache at the end.

Not just Wests with their flamboyance, but most teams were great to watch.

Agreed. I don't know if we'll ever see teams like that again. Eels, Dragons and Tigers were all fantastic to watch. While the Knights were playing like a top 4 team while they were coming last. Not to mention how good it was seeing the Roosters, Dogs and Panthers miss the finals after dominating the last few years and the Cowboys finally coming good.

 

[Mr Saab]

90s was much better than now. More stars, better halves.

 

[Teddyboy]

90s was much better than now. More stars, better halves.

No one has mentioned the jersey's were way better then.

 

[Loudstrat]

Defensive structure and rule changes have altered the game massively. There was more open play back then, and more thinking and less instinct. That said, the best attacking sides to watch were the Warriors, Tigers and Cowboys from the mid 2000's.

 

[seanoff]

the quality of the halves is definitely fallen away and with that the ability of teams to do different things and the quality of the attack has fallen away.

1985 random yr. the following guys were playing halfback and 5/8.

Sterlo, Stuart, Phil Blake, Des Hasler, Brett Kenny, Terry Lamb, Greg Alexander, Cliff Lyons, Ivan Henkjak, Michael Hagan, Steve Ella, Scott Gale, Steve Mortimer, Craig Coleman, and in Brisbane a quite useful Wally Lewis.

What the NSW selectors esp would pay to have that choice now. instead they have to settle for Mitchell *****g Pearce. in fact almost any combo of the above would eat Pearce etc.

atm the game is 12 similarly sized guys, taking 3 -4 hitups, a block play and a kick by the token slightly smaller bloke.

there's too much dead time. 45 secs of running time to take a drop out. **** that, make it quick and stop the clock when the ball is not in play.

scrums, hey we need a rest. lets all mill about like cows for 40 secs.

the players are fitter now, and get more rest in games. why? make the play 80 mins. if the ball is dead, kill the clock.

it needs to become less predictable. how, i'm not sure.

and small skillful kids are getting lost in the juniors because they are playing against giants. it's not fun at 12 to 16 to be run over week after week by guys who are double + your weight. and it's not just the mums making the decisions either, a lot of kids pull out of their own accord. yeah it's funny to watch on league of their own on the footy show when a huge kid just blasts the defensive line apart, but not much fun week in week out for those kids.

 

[LineBall]

Seanoff speaks the truth.

 

[Red Bear]

Re quality of halves
- How much is the halves not being as good and how much is the defence simply being a lot better.

I love watching old footy (for a start, my club was playing first grade). But watching it and comparing it to now, the speed of the game was slower and the defence wasnt nearly as good.

The scrum becoming uncontested changed the role of the forwards and subsequently the types of players that got ahead, and that combined with a massive increase in professionalism over the last 20 years has seen body types very similar across much of the sides, with hookers/halves sometimes looking a bit different.

 

[Red Bear]

10 metre rule has also had a big part in the lack of smaller guys in the game, suddenly the big guys have a heap more momentum when they hit the defensive line, making the impact on defenders and especially smaller guys more pronnounced

And in NSW at least the mod league rules havent helped at all, but I believe they've been tweaked in the last year or two to help develop halves better than what has been the case

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Re quality of halves
- How much is the halves not being as good and how much is the defence simply being a lot better.

I love watching old footy (for a start, my club was playing first grade). But watching it and comparing it to now, the speed of the game was slower and the defence wasnt nearly as good.

The scrum becoming uncontested changed the role of the forwards and subsequently the types of players that got ahead, and that combined with a massive increase in professionalism over the last 20 years has seen body types very similar across much of the sides, with hookers/halves sometimes looking a bit different.

Interesting on the halves, back in the 80s and early 90s basically Benny Elias was your only creative hooker, with Royce Simmons having his moments. Then Kerrod and Steve Walters came along and hookers became extra halves really possibly at the detriment of the true halves position, particularly 5/8. So if you count hooker as being a half then the playmaker stocks are probably at the same level or better as they were 20 years ago.


Plus the quality of ball playing fullback is probably better than the 80s and 90s.

 

[Pete Cash]

This explosion at fullback is just the result of professionalism. The number one most important attribute for a Rugby League player is athleticism. Very few players can get by on smarts or craftiness anymore. There are a few players who are in the traditional mold like Cam Smith but I don't think there will be many players like Jason Smith taking the line on in slow motion while he plots his next move.

So with this focus on athleticism some of these freakish athletes will be more freakish than others and have more ball skills. These guys tend to end up at fullback. Just look at the production line of fullbacks in the NRL. The Raiders (if Ahearn can make the step up...and again the only question mark on him is if he is a good enough athlete) might go through three decent to very good fullbacks in the space of what...a year.

Is there really a bad fullback in the NRL ?

 

[Red Bear]

Interesting on the halves, back in the 80s and early 90s basically Benny Elias was your only creative hooker, with Royce Simmons having his moments. Then Kerrod and Steve Walters came along and hookers became extra halves really possibly at the detriment of the true halves position, particularly 5/8. So if you count hooker as being a half then the playmaker stocks are probably at the same level or better as they were 20 years ago.


Plus the quality of ball playing fullback is probably better than the 80s and 90s.

I think alot of this is to do with how structured the game has become. The hooker and the fullback are just about the only two players who actually play on both sides of the field. Second rowers and centres have their channel to run in and often times halfback and 5/8 play the same role, just on different sides of the field. Hence the fullbacks, who roam, are vital to chime into both sides of the field in the backline, whilst you cant really win without a decent hooker, as they also get the team moving both sides of the field and will take advantage of quick play the balls etc.