Jump to content

RL is in the best shape it's ever been


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Look, the bottom line is that we see Regan Grace and Tommy Makinson making fantastic breaks and scoring great tries... likewise Ryan Papenhuyzen, Josh Addo-Carr in the NRL.

If they can do this today then of course the likes of Offiah, Hanley and Robinson could do it.  I just don't see the logic in saying they couldn't. 

Aye, it's a really odd stance. The reason Grace hasn't scored as many as Offiah is that he is nowhere near the player Offiah was, not the rules. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 217
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Rugby League is the 5th most popular sport in the country.  https://www.statista.com/statistics/686971/highest-attended-types-of-sport-in-the-uk/ Of course we can all just use whatever stats

I wouldn’t put a penny on the validly of RFL participation figures being correct Ive worked within multiple youth set ups, schools and the amateur game for decades and will trust the veracity of

I mentioned it elsewhere, but I feel it deserves its own thread.  Seeing as we always hear people saying the game is declining in the UK or some even go as far as to say things like "dying a slow deat

Posted Images

5 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

There’s loads of players that do things that captivate the audience. Many multiple times a game. Regan Grace is a case in point. Each try in his hattrick vs Leeds deserved its own highlights reel. We, as a sport, don’t appear to have the capabilities to use this content in the correct ways in this day and age in the way that other sports do. 

This whole “no superstars” thing is a massive myth. 

Clearly not, as there is not a single name in RL that has. I’m talking general audience here, not the RL bubble/RLpurists who were satisfied watching the 80 minute arm wrestle that was 2017 RLWC final. And to quote the BBC, a “final hardly anyone seems to be talking about”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/42191891/rugby-league-world-cup-the-final-hardly-anyone-seems-to-be-talking-about

You idea and my idea of what constitutes “captivating an audience” are clearly very different.

4 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Look, the bottom line is that we see Regan Grace and Tommy Makinson making fantastic breaks and scoring great tries... likewise Ryan Papenhuyzen, Josh Addo-Carr in the NRL.

If they can do this today then of course the likes of Offiah, Hanley and Robinson could do it.  I just don't see the logic in saying they couldn't. 

Ok, let’s pretend Offiah and Hanley could do now what they did then. What you are essentially saying is today’s players, Grace, Makinson and co. are bobbins (ie. gash, tripe, fifth rate, bog standard) given they take five years to score what Hanley and Offiah can do in one.

I beg to differ. I rate the todays players very highly, and they aren’t afforded the same platform on the field to excel as Offiah and Hanley were.

 

And again the old “more coverage” line is trotted out by others. It’s tiresome when that myth has been refuted. The England RU team has more terrestrial coverage than ever, and does not have a solitary household name. The truth of the matter is both codes have become more attritional, defensively sound, more risk averse, less free flowing, less open attacking, and as a result the potential headline makers, ie. the attacking players, are shackled. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Aye, it's a really odd stance. The reason Grace hasn't scored as many as Offiah is that he is nowhere near the player Offiah was, not the rules. 

No good players today then Dave?

So that’s it. Hanley and Offiah were stars because they were good, and there’s none of them today.

Lets all pack up and go home then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Clearly not, as there is not a single name in RL that has. I’m talking general audience here, not the RL bubble/RLpurists who were satisfied watching the 80 minute arm wrestle that was 2017 RLWC final. And to quote the BBC, a “final hardly anyone seems to be talking about”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/42191891/rugby-league-world-cup-the-final-hardly-anyone-seems-to-be-talking-about

You idea and my idea of what constitutes “captivating an audience” are clearly very different.

Ok, let’s pretend Offiah and Hanley could do now what they did then. What you are essentially saying is today’s players, Grace, Makinson and co. are bobbins (ie. gash, tripe, fifth rate, bog standard) given they take five years to score what Hanley and Offiah can do in one.

I beg to differ. I rate the todays players very highly, and they aren’t afforded the same platform on the field to excel as Offiah and Hanley were.

 

And again the old “more coverage” line is trotted out by others. It’s tiresome when that myth has been refuted. The England RU team has more terrestrial coverage than ever, and does not have a solitary household name. The truth of the matter is both codes have become more attritional, defensively sound, more risk averse, less free flowing, less open attacking, and as a result the potential headline makers, ie. the attacking players, are shackled. 

 

What a load of confused gibberish / waffle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Clearly not, as there is not a single name in RL that has. I’m talking general audience here, not the RL bubble/RLpurists who were satisfied watching the 80 minute arm wrestle that was 2017 RLWC final. And to quote the BBC, a “final hardly anyone seems to be talking about”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/42191891/rugby-league-world-cup-the-final-hardly-anyone-seems-to-be-talking-about

You idea and my idea of what constitutes “captivating an audience” are clearly very different.

Ok, let’s pretend Offiah and Hanley could do now what they did then. What you are essentially saying is today’s players, Grace, Makinson and co. are bobbins (ie. gash, tripe, fifth rate, bog standard) given they take five years to score what Hanley and Offiah can do in one.

I beg to differ. I rate the todays players very highly, and they aren’t afforded the same platform on the field to excel as Offiah and Hanley were.

 

And again the old “more coverage” line is trotted out by others. It’s tiresome when that myth has been refuted. The England RU team has more terrestrial coverage than ever, and does not have a solitary household name. The truth of the matter is both codes have become more attritional, defensively sound, more risk averse, less free flowing, less open attacking, and as a result the potential headline makers, ie. the attacking players, are shackled. 

 

The world has changed , let's face it , talentless no marks like Gemma Collins are famous these days for being gobby and fat , and speaking in an awful Essex accent 

Edited by GUBRATS
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Ok, let’s pretend Offiah and Hanley could do now what they did then. What you are essentially saying is today’s players, Grace, Makinson and co. are bobbins (ie. gash, tripe, fifth rate, bog standard) given they take five years to score what Hanley and Offiah can do in one.

I beg to differ. I rate the todays players very highly, and they aren’t afforded the same platform on the field to excel as Offiah and Hanley were.

 

There are two factors at play here.

One. Hanley and Offiah are two of the all time greats... the finest two attacking players I have seen this country produce in the last 35 years I have been following the game. There is no shame in modern players not being as good... I don't expect to see a player of Hanley's ability again in my lifetime. 

Two. The defences in the modern game are better... and certainly better from the top team to the bottom. I am OK for points to be hard earned, it doesn't do the sport any harm at all. Of course I say this and yet we know that modern teams score more points than the 80's and 90's anyway.

If Hanley and Offiah were in the modern game they would be as exciting and watchable than ever.  Would they get as many tries, maybe not. But they would be superb.

As others have said, if they were not as famous today as they were in their heyday it would be based on other matters than what they could do on the pitch.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

They became truly arrogant to a massive degree , if it wasn't a win by 50 points they'd abuse their own players , and never gave any credit to their opposition 

Well, you have called me a moron because I drive an Audi and obnoxious and truly arrogant because I supported Wigan in the 80's and 90's.

But I want to reassure you. You are not coming across as bitter at all.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DC77 said:

Clearly not, as there is not a single name in RL that has. I’m talking general audience here, not the RL bubble/RLpurists who were satisfied watching the 80 minute arm wrestle that was 2017 RLWC final. And to quote the BBC, a “final hardly anyone seems to be talking about”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/42191891/rugby-league-world-cup-the-final-hardly-anyone-seems-to-be-talking-about

You idea and my idea of what constitutes “captivating an audience” are clearly very different.

Ok, let’s pretend Offiah and Hanley could do now what they did then. What you are essentially saying is today’s players, Grace, Makinson and co. are bobbins (ie. gash, tripe, fifth rate, bog standard) given they take five years to score what Hanley and Offiah can do in one.

I beg to differ. I rate the todays players very highly, and they aren’t afforded the same platform on the field to excel as Offiah and Hanley were.

 

And again the old “more coverage” line is trotted out by others. It’s tiresome when that myth has been refuted. The England RU team has more terrestrial coverage than ever, and does not have a solitary household name. The truth of the matter is both codes have become more attritional, defensively sound, more risk averse, less free flowing, less open attacking, and as a result the potential headline makers, ie. the attacking players, are shackled. 

 

Banging my head against a brick wall here. We’re rubbish at using the content we have, of which there’s plenty of excellent content in the form of tries, passes, kicks, tackles, dummys etc and using that content to showcase the talents we’ve got. We’re in a very different period to when two RU converts played the game, that you seem to keep harping on about, in which the way people consume sport and use their free time is very different to 30+ years ago. We have plenty of talents in the sport here, we lack the know how and capability to use these people and the content they create, in the form of their work on the field, to project it into the eyes of millennials and younger. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dunbar said:

There are two factors at play here.

One. Hanley and Offiah are two of the all time greats... the finest two attacking players I have seen this country produce in the last 35 years I have been following the game. There is no shame in modern players not being as good... I don't expect to see a player of Hanley's ability again in my lifetime. 

Two. The defences in the modern game are better... and certainly better from the top team to the bottom. I am OK for points to be hard earned, it doesn't do the sport any harm at all. Of course I say this and yet we know that modern teams score more points than the 80's and 90's anyway.

If Hanley and Offiah were in the modern game they would be as exciting and watchable than ever.  Would they get as many tries, maybe not. But they would be superb.

As others have said, if they were not as famous today as they were in their heyday it would be based on other matters than what they could do on the pitch.

Great post, also remember that Hanley (who I also suspect is not going to be surpassed for many years) and Offiah, played for a Wigan team that had a phenomenal run of CC success, with many games broadcast on the BBC, therefore making their play visible to the masses. Today’s stars are generally hidden behind Sky’s paywall so are less likely to be known by the general public. The challenge for the sport is to use all available media to make these guys and their play more accessible to the general public

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dunbar said:

There are two factors at play here.

One. Hanley and Offiah are two of the all time greats... the finest two attacking players I have seen this country produce in the last 35 years I have been following the game. There is no shame in modern players not being as good... I don't expect to see a player of Hanley's ability again in my lifetime. 

Two. The defences in the modern game are better... and certainly better from the top team to the bottom. I am OK for points to be hard earned, it doesn't do the sport any harm at all. Of course I say this and yet we know that modern teams score more points than the 80's and 90's anyway.

If Hanley and Offiah were in the modern game they would be as exciting and watchable than ever.  Would they get as many tries, maybe not. But they would be superb.

As others have said, if they were not as famous today as they were in their heyday it would be based on other matters than what they could do on the pitch.

So you have to go back over 25 years to find players of that level. That’s what you are saying. This is where I disagree. I think the talent is there, today, but hasn’t had the same platform. Your second para answers this, yes defences are “better” (inverted commas as better organised means less open attacking play, which is not an advance). And your third para, “as” exciting you say, but then admit they wouldn’t (“maybe not”) get as many tries, having also already said it would be “hard earned”.

It’s not just harder for attacking players today, it’s a lot harder. A top player being able to score in one season what a top player today needs five seasons to match, that’s quite a leap.

No question there are great moments. Rob Burrow’s try in the 2011 Grand final is as good as anything in sport. The problem is for a player to really elevate themselves the volume of great moments has to be much greater. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Well, you have called me a moron because I drive an Audi and obnoxious and truly arrogant because I supported Wigan in the 80's and 90's.

But I want to reassure you. You are not coming across as bitter at all.

Not all Audi drivers are morons , just most of them 

Not all Wigan fans were obnoxious ##### back then , just a lot of them 😉

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/02/2021 at 20:53, DC77 said:

No good players today then Dave?

So that’s it. Hanley and Offiah were stars because they were good, and there’s none of them today.

Lets all pack up and go home then.

They were legends of the game. Freaks. Other players at that time weren't scoring those tries either. At Warrington we had Des Drummond and Mark Forster and we were happy if they got 10 to 15 tries a year. 

But if you can't see quality attacking players in RL, I respectfully suggest it isn't the game for you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still trying to figure out the logic of DC77.

You say that Basketball has too many points and that "points doesn’t equate excitement.... p-## easy scoring devoid of significance, unless it gets to the last minute and scores are close" and yet you want more tries scored in Rugby.

Then you say "It’s all about the manner of how the points are scored" and reference FIFA World Cup top scorer Miroslav Klose who doesn’t score the type of goals that make headlines and yet then say why aren't Regan Grace and Makinson not scoring 60 tries a year.

Surely by your own argument that the tries and points have significance and that they should be headline making... you should be looking for fewer tries, not more. It should be harder to score in the modern game, not easier as then the headlines will be by those exceptional tries that win games. But no, you want players running in 60 a year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all sides to this debate have a point. The game is clearly more clinical and structured now, and defence is better. There are less individual "wow!" tries these days, and much more tries that come from rehearsed, structured play. That said, of course Offiah and Hanley would be top players now! But would they be having the incredible attention grabbing days out that they did in their time? And the answer is... Maybe! I'd say Sam Tomkins in 2010 was every bit the brilliant individual superstar they were, but while his profile did go up, it certainly wasn't to the Offiah extent. Why? Maybe because he wasn't doing it on the BBC, wasn't doing it in test victories against Australia, or some other reason... Maybe it's not game related at all. Maybe it was about harder to define qualities like charisma or appearance, or whatever it is that makes some singers popstars, others no names. My rambling point being, there are a lot of factors at play!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/01/2021 at 18:05, graveyard johnny said:

think i prefer the days of offiah hanley - kangaroo tours- top ru talent signing up and off season aussies gracing the english game, stadiums with atmosphere, car parking spaces at grounds, pubs with a stripper on before the game, etc etc

🤣 Back in the day when I turned out for Hatfield Main, after the match we got a free meal (pie chips n peas) a beer & a lady 😉 dancing on a stage. 🤣🤣🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...