: Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:59 am  

isaac1 wrote:

.I cannot even comprehend that people believe Senior to be in the same class as him.

Who believes that?

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:01 am  

tigertot wrote:

Who believes that?

Mrs Senior?

[Bullseye]

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:43 am  

Terry Monster wrote:

Paul O'Loughlin was right up there alongside him for skill aswell, but he worked for the team alot more.

Terry Monster wrote:

Paul O'Loughlin was right up there alongside him for skill aswell, but he worked for the team alot more.

Paul Loughlin was a good centre but he wasn't Paul Newlove. Check out the number of tries Lockers scored at Saints and Bradford in comparison with Newlove.

Newlove could score out of nothing. I remember some beauties versus Cas in 93 where he beat four players to go 50m+ That was against the likes of Blackmore, Nikau, Steadman and Kemp - no slouches back then.

Loughlin may have been a more reliable defender and more dependable for GB but at domestic level he had much less of an impact than Newlove.

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:55 am  

isaac1 wrote:

Just walked out!!!!!

Wanted to leave because his mentor and agent had been sacked, and provided the club with a deal that enabled us to build the team that won the league in 1997 and be successful beyond that.

Saints had a good squad that needed on star to make them a success. we needed several good players to make a better squad. both clubs and Newlove benefitted. Yes it was a shame to see him go but Dwyer, Loughlin(who a previous poster implies was better than Newlove anyway) and Nickle, plus the cash to sign Lowes, McNamara and Spruce!!!!


crap deal on our side wasnt it!

You forgot the bit about wanted to leave and then refused to play until he left. It was a great deal for the club but you can't refuse to play for a club just because your friend gets sacked.

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:07 am  

Bullseye wrote:

Paul Loughlin was a good centre but he wasn't Paul Newlove. Check out the number of tries Lockers scored at Saints and Bradford in comparison with Newlove.

Newlove could score out of nothing. I remember some beauties versus Cas in 93 where he beat four players to go 50m+ That was against the likes of Blackmore, Nikau, Steadman and Kemp - no slouches back then.

Loughlin may have been a more reliable defender and more dependable for GB but at domestic level he had much less of an impact than Newlove.

Newlove was the better player. Loughlin was the better centre in the classic mould. In fact, Loughlin in his Saints days was the best classic British centre I can remember seeing (my Rugby memory kicks in somewhat after Neil Fox's centre-playing heyday). Newlove had the strength, speed and step that allowed him to be a scorer rather than a provider. Loughlin was provider par excellence.

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:28 am  

Loughlin was a good centre, he had all the physical talents necessary, but apart from his contribution in the infamous Sydney test of 1988 I have no recollection of his career. Newlove OTOH, was a genius who wasted his talents.

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:15 pm  

tigertot wrote:

Loughlin was a good centre, he had all the physical talents necessary, but apart from his contribution in the infamous Sydney test of 1988 I have no recollection of his career. Newlove OTOH, was a genius who wasted his talents.

Hence my initial statement that Newlove was the better player. The distinction was between a classical exponent of the centre's art, and a freak of nature. In the same way, if you asked me to name a classic loose forward, it wouldn't be Ellery Hanley - but nevertheless he wore 13 and was better than anyone else who has done so in my recollection.

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:16 pm  

Loughlin was first choice GB centre in '92 but broke his arm early on in first test at Sydney. Not sure if that was the first time, but he did break it (I think) three times, which curtailed his career. Back in the day, Loughlin was a very good centre and deserved his GB caps and plaudits domestically.

By the time Newlove arrived, the game was six or seven years on and playing techniques and coaching tactics were evolving. Despite my Red Vee tinted specs, Newlove was without doubt a better centre than Loughlin, but Loughlin was still a great centre.

Already noted by others that the three players (Dwyer, Loughlin & Nickle) were instrumental in Bradford's resurgence.

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 12:33 pm  

I concur that Loughlin was a better provider, but when you were as good as Newlove, you scored yourself, not just putting your winger away. Just look at how good Jonathan Scales looked playing outside Lockers, then i 98 When He'd gone, Scales looked very average!

Both were different in style but very good quality players. however, if I was to pick the best british left centre from the 20 years i've been watching the game, it would be Newlove by a mile.

: Mon Jun 22, 2009 1:00 pm  

tigertot wrote:

Newlove OTOH, was a genius who wasted his talents.

how did he waste his talents?