Archived

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

The Daddy

Sean O'Loughlin v Paul Sculthorpe - which one was better?

69 posts in this topic

If you could select just one to play at loose forward for your team which one would you have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could select just one to play at loose forward for your team which one would you have?

There is no question and no need to answer,,,in fact its a really stupid question...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no question and no need to answer,,,in fact its a really stupid question...

Sculthorpe by a mile

SOL is qualty though but PS had the X Factor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would go for O'Loughlin, both great players. Similar in some ways different in others. I think he's a bit more influential compared to Sculthorpe at his best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think with these sort of questions you'd need to wait 5 or 10 years after SOL has retired before you could answer it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could select just one to play at loose forward for your team which one would you have?

Sculthorpe was a much better player, but SOL a much more honest one. I'd have SOL in a Bulls shirt before Sculthorpe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends if you were building a side or adding a player to it. If I was adding a player to a side I'd go Sculthorpe if I was building a side I'd go O Loughlin. Sculthorpe was probably slightly better than all areas than O Loughlin apart from organisation. I think the organisation O Loughlin offers between the forwards and the backs is priceless. It's one of the reasons why Wigan have been so successful over the last couple of years and the loss of quality talent has not affected them that much. A 6 - 7th place quality squad was made into a doubling winning one due to 2 players in Tomkins and O Loughlin. The organisation they offered to the side meant they could play with a ruthless structure which blew sides away by exposing their weaknesses. O Loughlin was a major part in the organisation. Add that to his work in defence and attack and also ball handling skills I'd build a team around O Loughlin. I'd have Sculthorpe in at second row though.

In my SL dream team I have both of them in the side. It goes:

Sam Tomkins

Ryan Hall

Keith Senior

Jamie Lyon

Lesley Vanikolo

Lee Briers

Sean Long

Jamie Peacock

Keiron Cunningham

James Graham

Paul Sculthorpe

Andy Farrell

Sean O Loughlin

Sculthorpe the better player but I'd rather build a team round O Loughlin for the reasons stated above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scully filled in at half back and kicked goals, he was a more rounded player, the better question would be farrell or scully..... but a neutral answer would not be found on this site.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends if you were building a side or adding a player to it. If I was adding a player to a side I'd go Sculthorpe if I was building a side I'd go O Loughlin. Sculthorpe was probably slightly better than all areas than O Loughlin apart from organisation. I think the organisation O Loughlin offers between the forwards and the backs is priceless. It's one of the reasons why Wigan have been so successful over the last couple of years and the loss of quality talent has not affected them that much. A 6 - 7th place quality squad was made into a doubling winning one due to 2 players in Tomkins and O Loughlin. The organisation they offered to the side meant they could play with a ruthless structure which blew sides away by exposing their weaknesses. O Loughlin was a major part in the organisation. Add that to his work in defence and attack and also ball handling skills I'd build a team around O Loughlin. I'd have Sculthorpe in at second row though.

In my SL dream team I have both of them in the side. It goes:

Sam Tomkins

Ryan Hall

Keith Senior

Jamie Lyon

Lesley Vanikolo

Lee Briers

Sean Long

Jamie Peacock

Keiron Cunningham

James Graham

Paul Sculthorpe

Andy Farrell

Sean O Loughlin

Sculthorpe the better player but I'd rather build a team round O Loughlin for the reasons stated above.

you have 2 scrum halfs and three loose forwards, they would cancel each other out, you are asking a lot of the 2 props as the 'honest' forwards....and in SL the interchanges are part of the team so you would need these.....just sayin....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you have 2 scrum halfs and three loose forwards, they would cancel each other out, you are asking a lot of the 2 props as the 'honest' forwards....and in SL the interchanges are part of the team so you would need these.....just sayin....

You can have 2 scrum halfs at 6 and 7. The best can adapt their roles which I'm sure the above could easily. If you're unsure then watch recent Australia and Queensland performances with Cronk and Thurston who both are scrum halves.

I don't think you can say the backrow don't get through honest work. All 3 were among the hardest workers in their respective sides. They just had exceptional ball handling skills which is why they were put at 13. Having a backrow full of ball handlers is very hard to play against IMO which is why I'd want them in. They'd get through the graft just as much as other second rowers who do not have the equivalent ball handling skills. I don't have stats to hand for all 3 of them. But I know for O Loughlin off past readings he is always in the top for tackle counts and metres. I'm sure Farrell and Sculthorpe would be the same.

I did not think the bench was relevant to the point I was trying to make. I was just trying to highlight the structure I would have in an RL side. Putting it in a X111 would make it easier to visualize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can have 2 scrum halfs at 6 and 7. The best can adapt their roles which I'm sure the above could easily. If you're unsure then watch recent Australia and Queensland performances with Cronk and Thurston who both are scrum halves.

I don't think you can say the backrow don't get through honest work. All 3 were among the hardest workers in their respective sides. They just had exceptional ball handling skills which is why they were put at 13. Having a backrow full of ball handlers is very hard to play against IMO which is why I'd want them in. They'd get through the graft just as much as other second rowers who do not have the equivalent ball handling skills. I don't have stats to hand for all 3 of them. But I know for O Loughlin off past readings he is always in the top for tackle counts and metres. I'm sure Farrell and Sculthorpe would be the same.

I did not think the bench was relevant to the point I was trying to make. I was just trying to highlight the structure I would have in an RL side. Putting it in a X111 would make it easier to visualize.

not to be critical but if briers could have adapted as you say saints wouldnt have sold him.....

I like your approach but it seems like too many chiefs and not enough indians.....

they would get in each others way with only two willing to make the hard yards.......

also the modern game is a team of 17 with 13 on the pitch at any one time, you could then put farrell on the bench as your utility player.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scully filled in at half back and kicked goals, he was a more rounded player, the better question would be farrell or scully..... but a neutral answer would not be found on this site.....

I'm neutral. It was Sculthorpe :tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ridiculous question.

O'Loughlin is a good player.

Sculthorpe was a great and will rightly take his place amongst the legends of the game. O'Loughlin won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul Sculthorpe.

 

Although he is one of my favourite players in SL history.

 

(I waited for aaaages for the Saints coach at Valley Parade in 2002 so he could sign my RLW with him on the cover.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not to be critical but if briers could have adapted as you say saints wouldnt have sold him.....

 

I'm not sure we did?  I think he left as he was unhappy at being dropped.

 

In answer to the OP's question: Scully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get how comparing two players who were/are predominently loose forwards is a ridiculous thing to do.

 

For me O'Loughlin edges it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sculthorpe by a distance. O'Loughlin is a great player but Sculthorpe is amongst the most complete players that I've ever seen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not to be critical but if briers could have adapted as you say saints wouldnt have sold him.....

I like your approach but it seems like too many chiefs and not enough indians.....

they would get in each others way with only two willing to make the hard yards.......

also the modern game is a team of 17 with 13 on the pitch at any one time, you could then put farrell on the bench as your utility player.....

I don't really agree with much of your post tbh. Briers has played stand off for a long time - outside of out and out scrum halves like Myler, Johns, Wood, Langer - he is a stand off, wore the number 6 for God knows how long too. 

 

In terms of the back row that he picked I think that you could definitely work with that, as at different stages of their careers they did all play those positions I think. It would need strong management and clearly defined roles, but Sculthorpe and Farrell could easily play 2nd row and be brilliant at it.

 

On the OP's question, I'd probably go for O'Loughlin. I'm a big fan of players who do the little things right, it's how Morley played during his time at Warrington rather than being a dynamic player from earlier in his career, but I think he does more right than Sculthorpe did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it shows how far Lockers' stock has risen that he is now compared with Sculthorpe. There was a time he came second to Jamie Langley in a poll on here...

If we are comparing the 2 players at their best, Sculthorpe would be the better player. He won us games against the Aussies. But, for longevity, courage, and making absolutely the most of his talent, Lockers will have given as much to his club by the time he is through than Sculthorpe gave to his clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Lockers is a brilliant player but would still pick Sculthorpe, at his best I can't think of a better British loose forward that I have seen play, Farrel included

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given how panface has p###ed all over our game, both Lockers and Sculthorpe would get my vote over him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On their best days, I'd go with Sculthorpe. Over the course of their careers though, I'd lean towards O'Loughlin.

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