Especially Mathers

Exactly.



Richie Mathers > Steve Hampson

Michael Platt > Alan Tait

Dennis Moran > Wally Lewis, Peter Sterling, Brett Kenny, Laurie Daley, Cliff Lyons

James Graham > Glen Lazarus, Andy Platt, Dean Pay, Paul Harrigon

Ellery Hanley - the most gifted player of my generation.



and for leading a team like it was a battlefield



Shaun Edwards

the post at the top that mentioned Kevin Ward was spot on- great player , you wouldnt have wanted him against you - or for those like me born in the 60s. Mal Reilly --- only saw him when i was a kid but what an all round player and hard doesnt go near to describing his presence on the field



and of course both of the above got total respect from the Australians when they played club rugby in the ARL- that says it all

But in 20 years they will become crap.

Has Brett Kenny forgotten that Wigan had to sell their ground before the salary cap because of what they paid their players?



And that Saints won the double in 96 pre-salary cap - so our winning team was built before the introduction of the salary cap?



One day, he'll realise that Wigan's sh*tness lies not with the salary cap, but his club's incompetent management of it. But he won't admit it.

I think if you're talking about the legends of yesteryear the key thing is whether they physically had the stature and basic pace to play in the modern era. Skills clearly aren't an issue - someone with Murphy's skills would be a skilful player in any era.



I think if you are talking forwards say from the 20s or 30s most of them weren't tall enough or big enough framed to allow them to develop the physique needed to handle the physicality of modern RL (tthe players of that era were at least as hard as the forwards playing SL today, they just wouldn't be big enough and couldn't be even if they had modern gyms and nutrition).



The unfortunate comment about Boston in my signature is so laughable because given modern fitness methods (which we don't seem to have at the moment at Wigan

) I have absolutely no doubt that the prodigious physical gifts of Boston would allow him to shine in the modern era. Would he have been as good as Offiah as a winger? Could he have been an international class strike centre maybe? We'll never know the answers to these questions but its ludicrous to suggest that he wouldn't have been any good in the modern era.

How can BK forget something which didn't happen?





Instead of the usual over-simplification and urban myth propaganda of the pro-SC brigade, try reading the multitude of threads where the massive overspend on the new stand - redeveloping the ground, that was never on Stains agenda but Wigan were trying their best -and the lowest gate prices in Div One - a misguided but benevolent policy by a club that has always been for the people, which is why our crowds are so much better than yours - are identified as the key reasons Wigan got so heavily into debt.

Now come come. Surely nothing can touch your "Noble must be had up for Fraud" gem.



That will NEVER be beaten.

Not even by the train of thought that generated something along the lines of...i never saw him play but he was not as good as Johns...(would quote it directly but i am not that sad to spend my time looking back over the dross you sometimes type.



Mate that was a turn of phrase, stop trying to deflect from a thread that has made you look very silly indeed.





I cannot believe you have become that obsessed with me you have added it to your sig!





You really need to get out more!

If you think Wigan's financial troubles were all down to that stand, well . . . .



And re: your ticket sales point - that's a nice way of spinning "we were spending a lot more than we were getting in".

I think if you look at what makes a good RL player:



Talent

Skill

Size

Strength

Fitness

Speed

Determination/dedication







Probably missed some off but that should do for a start.





The first one you are born with. As a working assumption let's assume players of 30 years ago and current players are equal.



Skill- skills have improved in todays game - forwards offload more and generally have more in their lockers than those of yesteryear. Backs - debatable- call it a tie



Size - There were 13stone forwards around back then. Go figure. Todays players are much bigger



Strength- men against boys. Our under 21's are probably stronger on average than the pre-Fairburn team.



Fitness- Not even worth mentioning. Suffice to say a game of touch rugby then 4 pints of Guiness is no longer the training schedule.



Speed - overall faster, but there were a few flyers back then. Call it a draw to avoid arguments.



Determinatoin/Dedicaton - Hard to evaluate. Gong for a draw here too.







However, one thing that is overlooked is technology. Today if there is a weakness in a players game, you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be exposed.





Most if not all serious games are recorded and video analysis of plays and players is a key part of training.



Therefore any "flaws" in a players game are constantly identified and acted upon.



The key effect of this is to improve the player.