Omar Little wrote:
Surely in the one division era there were plenty of uneven match-ups? (genuine question). Also within my memory I can remember pretty uncompetitive pre-SL era seasons (eg 1994-1995).
There were uneven match-ups each season but the same small group of teams didn't dominate the competitions like they do today. Similarly, the same teams weren't always whipping boys. Within my memory, I remember lots of teams being genuinely competitive and winning silverware from late 60's, 70's and 80's... Leigh, Fev, Cas, Wakey, Widnes, Fax, Salford, Dewsbury, Hull KR were all champions and/or CC winners as well as the usual SL suspects. Other clubs also picked up some of the less glamorous silverware on offer at the time... even Bramley!
Those with a shorter pre-SL memory than mine (and in some cases, conveniently so) will only remember the financially and psychologically damaging period of Wigan domination immediately prior to a huge media corporation (better known these days for setting the political agenda and hacking the phones of murder victims) buying up the the game lock, stock and barrel and demanding an elite 'super' competition to showcase. The best of the best each week was the plan - the reality has turned out to be very different as pretty much the same teams compete at the top year in, year out beating the usual whipping boy suspects 2 weeks out of every 3 and amassing team or individual points records in the process. As I opined in another thread, it seems entirely appropriate that Sinfield should break a points record in a SL fixture as predictably uneven and one-sided as the one on Friday.
Omar Little wrote:
I agree with your main point that its a completely different game now but it happened through gradual evolution not a step change (even if SL was a big step in that evolution). While it's impossible to truly compare players from different eras, records are records. IMHO you can't just pick and choose whether you compare them as their are too many factors - as you say theirs a more focus on attacking play an entertainment but on the other hand in the past kicking for goal from penalties (rather than going for a try) was more common with the try only being worth 1 more point.
It's a different game today where the rules have been modified in order to appeal to the whims of subscription TV, to speed up the game and provide attacking 'entertainment' as it's they who now own it. The skill factor in the game somehow got lost as a result of the 10 metre rule keeping teams apart so we are now left with a kind of Australian hybrid game of five drives or scoots from dummy half followed by a kick, but lacking in the requisite intensity due to lack of genuine competition and sufficient players of requisite quality.
On a more general note, if I'm going to apply bouquets or sermons of a reverential nature proclaiming greatness on the part of Leeds and their players, I'd rather do so under more appropriately-earned circumstances. IMO, this current Leeds squad could win 10 Super League titles but none of them will mean as much as the championship titles won in the late 60's and early 70's for one reason over and above anything else. When players like Shoebottom, Atkinson, Smith, Hynes, Holmes, Haigh, Fisher, Clawson, Jeanes et al were champions during a more competitively contested era, they were also beating Australia in an Ashes series and/or winning a World Cup. The current Super League lot are nowhere near to achieving that, not several years ago, not now and not in the foreseeable future either.
I fully expect all fans of the Super League product to disagree with everything I've said of course
