Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Padge

When does a team become a great team

65 posts in this topic

Leaving Sinfield out of the debate, I don't think many people would argue Brent Webb, Kylie Leuluai, Brett Delaney, Carll Ablett, JJB, Danny McGuire, Ryan Bailey are "greats", but all have been backbone players in the Leeds side. I think Burrow is pretty great though I have to say, and one or two of the youngsters have time to be great yet.

Think your being a bit harsh on McGuire, he is SL's all time top try scorer and has a few years left in him yet, I suspect his record will take a few years to surpass. I would class that as great myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right you are. It still feels a bit odd calling a team full of not great players great though, don't you think?

I dunno, do you have to have a team full of world beaters? Some of the greatest Bradford sides I watched a decade ago had players like Nathan Mcavoy, Scott Naylor, Stuart Spruce and Daniel Gardner playing key positions in them (to name a few) With all due respect, they are well respected at Odsal, but are hardly considered legends of the game at large. I think most teams who win pots have players like that, and for what it's worth the players you list are better than most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usain Bolt didn't win every 100m race he ran in 2012, but he won the race that mattered and is rightly feted as a great Olympic champion. Looked at through Rugby League tinted spectacles he could only be feted as a very fast runner who got lucky.

Looked at through the Steve May criteria for greatness, Bolt is a great. A number of runners have upped their game and run times that ten years ago would have been thought miraculous in an attempt to catch him (although they still haven't). He has changed the game of 100m sprinting. He is, without question, a great sprinter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, do you have to have a team full of world beaters? Some of the greatest Bradford sides I watched a decade ago had players like Nathan Mcavoy, Scott Naylor, Stuart Spruce and Daniel Gardner playing key positions in them (to name a few) With all due respect, they are well respected at Odsal, but are hardly considered legends of the game at large. I think most teams who win pots have players like that, and for what it's worth the players you list are better than most.

I dunno either. No doubt the players I listed are better than most, but never greats. Rugby league great Brett Delaney? I have often thought the key to a good team is to get about 80% of it consistenly playing at 6/7 out of 10 every week, with a few individuals capable of playing at 8 or 9 out of 10. But if you have guys who can drop off and give you a 3 or a 4 you're in trouble. Leeds seem to be full of 6 and 7 out of 10 players, but don't seem to have that many 8 and 9s given how well they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a huge part Leeds' success is having a nucleus of the team that has grown up playing together, Sinfield, Burrow, Mcguire, JJB, Ablett, Bailey etc. It's also a great achievement that there were only 2 overseas players in Saturdays Squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looked at through the Steve May criteria for greatness, Bolt is a great. A number of runners have upped their game and run times that ten years ago would have been thought miraculous in an attempt to catch him (although they still haven't). He has changed the game of 100m sprinting. He is, without question, a great sprinter.

Leeds have changed Rugby League. Ten years ago, no one really believed it was possible to win the SL title from fifth, because no team had ever done it or even got close. Now they've done it twice. Bolt's achievement is talked up, Leeds' achievement is talked down. That's Rugby League for ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leeds have changed Rugby League. Ten years ago, no one really believed it was possible to win the SL title from fifth, because no team had ever done it or even got close. Now they've done it twice. Bolt's achievement is talked up, Leeds' achievement is talked down. That's Rugby League for ya.

agreed, they have also shown that it takes investment in both and home grown talent to make a team and not big name signings something which leeds have been the biggest culprits of in the past.

I never understand the mentality of a lot of RL fans who constantly see the bad rather than the good. If its constantly the top 1 & 2 in the grand final (as it was for a few years) people moan that its not competitive, but when a team does it from outside the top 2 its a joke!

People have moaned as if Leeds had the easy route to the final, they didn't, Wigan did, but still couldn't do it.

And for those that say Leeds haven't performed until the last month of the season, Leeds have been in All 3 finals on offer this year and won 2, the first one being in February, the second in August and the third in October.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warrington demonstrated they are a great team, by the way they acted after last saturdays Grand final.They stayed on the field and listened to Sinfield's speech when they must have been heartbroken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leeds have changed Rugby League. Ten years ago, no one really believed it was possible to win the SL title from fifth, because no team had ever done it or even got close. .

Well, ten years ago the Roosters won the NRL from 4th. In fact, it's quite common to win the NRL from outside the top 2. In Britain Dewsbury once won the championship from 8th. Playing well in the play offs after a mediocre season is a brilliant achievement, but it doesn't really make you great.

I am setting a very high barrier here. Very high. But I think "great" warrants a high barrier.

Here's the example. Hunslet won "All Four Cups" in 1906 with a pack that was totally dominant. A brilliant achievement by a superb side. But Huddersfield won "All Four Cups" just shy of a decade later with a style of play based around the three quarters, a game that was a totally new synthesis of the best of traditional NU, Welsh RU and Australian rugby league.

Hunslet played the game as it was to an incredibly high standard. Huddersfield played a completely different game and changed it forever. One was the best side of the time, the other was one of the seminal teams, one of the greats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warrington demonstrated they are a great team, by the way they acted after last saturdays Grand final.They stayed on the field and listened to Sinfield's speech when they must have been heartbroken

They demonstrated that they are a decent bunch of blokes. Good on 'em.

But staying on the field after the match means literally nothing in relation to them as an RL team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, I think the closest any team in SL right now to greatness is Warrington.

If they can crack on and further develop the way they attack, then they can have the kind of long lasting influence I'm talking about.

They are a long way off though.

Probably the only team that really comes close over the past decade has been Melbourne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agreed, they have also shown that it takes investment in both and home grown talent to make a team and not big name signings something which leeds have been the biggest culprits of in the past.

I never understand the mentality of a lot of RL fans who constantly see the bad rather than the good. If its constantly the top 1 & 2 in the grand final (as it was for a few years) people moan that its not competitive, but when a team does it from outside the top 2 its a joke!

People have moaned as if Leeds had the easy route to the final, they didn't, Wigan did, but still couldn't do it.

And for those that say Leeds haven't performed until the last month of the season, Leeds have been in All 3 finals on offer this year and won 2, the first one being in February, the second in August and the third in October.

You're forgetting the fact the old system guaranteed one of the top two in the grand final, and even then it was much easier for the second team to get there.

There comparisions between Bolt and Leeds cannot be made, fair enough they are sporting achievements but can barely be put into the same context.

I guess it depends on what you define 'great' as. If you asked the question you'd get lots of different answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Melbourne Storm? The team that had a title stripped because of major salary cap infringements, I'm not sure how they can be considered great to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wigan in the late eighties and early nineties is the team that most people of the modern era tend to benchmark for comparison. But who are the great teams of recent, or past years, in comparison.

The current Leeds team are amongst the best, Saints from a few years ago were dabbling and Bradford made a stab at it.

I think at the moment Leeds are the leading light.

I think Wigan played many of their successful years as Professionals whilst the rest lagged behind. They certainly could not put that team together on todays salary cap...great side though. 6 titles in 9 years by Leeds is brilliant and many more to come I reckon looking at the youth coming through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say so. I think Leeds and many of their players have a lot of respect and admiration for what they do and how well they do their jobs at the business end. It is the fact that ,particulary the last two seasons , their achievement has been to "win" the end of season play off series rather than be what people percieve of as a "champion" team. There is a difference. Never before has a team deemed to be champions having lost 40% of their league matches. It seems to be perverse to many people. And it does stick in the craw to have to call such a team the best team, clearly they have not been for a majority of the season.

This might be more a reflection on the path the game has taken and the major failings of the current play off format rather than the Leeds club who could be said to be merely playing the system .

In addition this Leeds side has rarely been seen to come up with a performance of blowing another top side away with scintillating RL. Something the Saints , Wigan and Bradord sides could do with aplomb. They are masters of the gritty winning of close games but even mid table teams do not exactly fear them. It would be of great interest if they played an NRL club in mid to late season. For example i would happily wager had Leeds been playing the Storm in Sydney last week they would have struggled to trouble the scoreboard. Makes me a little sad to say that of our "champions".

The rules of the Comp are there for all to see at the beggining of the Season, the Winners of The GF will be Crowned Champions.

If Wigan, Warr, Saints etc are so good and consistent then go and win it for Heavens sake!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017