Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:06 pm  

Bulls Boy 2011 wrote:

Nowadays SL has created a more competitive league, 10 years ago the likes of Castleford wouldn't have been able to regularly turn over the bigger teams. In our pomp we were a class side but the league wasn't great. There were too many clubs who had no hope in games against the top 4. Except the odd one off (London, 2003 anyone? Dennis Moran show?). But all in all it wasn't as competitive.

The week to week league might be more competitive overall than it was in 1995, but there has still only been 4 winners of the title in the whole of super league, that's crazy really, and 1 of those teams now isn't even in the super league. Only 6 teams have made the grand final at all, and only 9 players have lifted the trophy as captain in 22 years.

SL was needed at the time, and we benefited greatly by seizing the opportunity quicker and better than most so was very good for us, but the game does feel to be slipping backwards at the moment - I'm just not sure if my view on that is too jaundiced because of our own problems and being out of the club- would I think the same if we were still competing in semis and finals? I honestly don't know, but I do know that as an outsider to SL but a huge RL fan I have no real desire to watch SL games each week at the moment, but I still go to the Bulls when I can (don't live close to Bradford anymore) and I now find myself watching my local amateur sides a lot more instead of SL for my RL fix.

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:18 pm  

bowlingboy wrote:

Another tester for how far we have fallen behind will be the World club challenge, I can't see Wigan been able to come close tbh.

The needs to be a overhaul of the whole game from the roots to the top of the tree in Rugby League, as has been mentioned in the thread earlier promote kids playing the game, when I started before Super League everyone at school played football, during Bull Mania there was a big surge in kids playing now with the lull around Bradford it back to football.
This could account for the lack of quality that Wayne Bennet has mentioned.

The game should be promoted to get kids into the game, then they should be nurtured and developed instead of paying over the odd's for average NRL players to see out their last season or two over here.

Again a bit of biased view since we have seen in first hand but investment into the championship to draw standards between the two leagues nearer, then championship 1 and amateur games, when you stand back and view from the outside the Gulf between Superleague and the NRL is massive but the Gulf between Superleague and the Championship is also with the 8's concept it will become a closed shop, where championship teams commit financial suicide to try compete.

In answer to the question in my opinion that doesn't account for much, Superleague was a big success initially but has been managed very poorly since, The only clubs that seem to be benefitting now are the big 4 (and FC) although another bad season and we could see Leeds booty start nipping.

As long as they dont go to bowling

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:20 pm  

Was 2011 the season where season tickets were £60? I think that might skew attendances a little!

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:24 pm  

rugbyreddog wrote:

The competition these days is more level,I agree, but that is only because the standard of the top teams has dropped rather than the bottom teams getting higher. AS for Cas, Wakey and Fev merging I wouldn't get into those specifics. You would take the most profitable teams (4,5 or 6) and then the other places would be up for grabs. This wouldn't be on the promise of a developed ground but with a backing of a certain amount of money held by the new league to show their viability. (This would be a bit like the bond that travel companies have to lodge with their governing body). If any club can do that then they could bid for a franchise. By the way the clubs that I described as 'profitable' should also lodge the given amount.

Thats a great point look at the cas side that Raper coached they were not good enough to regularly turn over the big boys like they do now but that side for me was equally as good as they have now

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:27 pm  

Duckman wrote:

The week to week league might be more competitive overall than it was in 1995, but there has still only been 4 winners of the title in the whole of super league, that's crazy really, and 1 of those teams now isn't even in the super league. Only 6 teams have made the grand final at all, and only 9 players have lifted the trophy as captain in 22 years.

I understand that and yet now in 2016 we have the very real possibility that a different team could win it, Hull FC, Warrington were in the semis and GF last year? So what could 2017 bring?

10 years ago this wouldn't have been close. I mean Hull FC did get to the GF in 2006 but in terms of consistently being up there with the so called big 4, they never were. In 2005 we smashed Hull 71-0 in the semi final? Yet the following year they nearly won it. I'd say this Hull FC side is more consistent than that in 2005/2006? Warrington seem to be the closest though out of the two. But like us in the 90's are they the chokers? When they do get that GF win wil it kickstart them like it did for us?

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:31 pm  

rugbyreddog wrote:

The competition these days is more level,I agree, but that is only because the standard of the top teams has dropped rather than the bottom teams getting higher.

Has the standard dropped? Or has the game changed in the way it is played. You put the 2016 Wigan Champions in the era of 2005 rugby league and they would blow everyone else out of the water, due to superior fitness and more open play. Alternatively you put one of the big teams of that era, say 2003 Wigan Warriors into this era of more structured rugby, they would get torn apart. Even by some of the mid-table teams now.

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:33 pm  

DrFeelgood wrote:

Was 2011 the season where season tickets were £60? I think that might skew attendances a little!

Quite possibly I'm not sure! But if it was it backs up my point about the disposable income. Less disposable income means people cannot afford the regular prices. This shows that there is still desire to watch, if the price is within the working class families disposable income then they will show.

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:55 pm  

Bulls Boy 2011 wrote:

The competition these days is more level,I
Has the standard dropped? Or has the game changed in the way it is played. You put the 2016 Wigan Champions in the era of 2005 rugby league and they would blow everyone else out of the water, due to superior fitness and more open play. Alternatively you put one of the big teams of that era, say 2003 Wigan Warriors into this era of more structured rugby, they would get torn apart. Even by some of the mid-table teams now.

Don't agree with that. The big teams early 2000s played some very open stuff, and smaller teams couldn't cope. Saints of early 2000s were the master of stuff like that and would blow the modern Saints team away (IMO). However I do agree you have to take the league as a whole - the team that went down this year (Hull KR) are probably stronger than Cas when they went down in 2006.

If you want a quick comparison on then vs now, looking at the World Club Challenge in the early 2000s vs now where English teams were regularly competing and winning - to the past couple of years have been embarrassing. Can't agree that teams that are getting paggered by NRL teams now would have beaten teams that were holding their own a decade back.

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:58 pm  

NRL has changed a lot to be fair too in the past 10 years. So it's still an unfair comparison :/

The reason we could beat the NRL teams back then is because we played an open brand of rugby rather than to a structure. Wigan are the best UK team in terms of playing a structure but man the NRL teams have that nailed down. It would take a very good performance from Wigan to win the WCC playing structured rugby or a Cronulla team not being overly interested and using it as a warm up!

And in the early 2000's it was only us who were consistent with the NRL teams, the others either got smashed or won by a mere point or try hardly on par in one off game:

2000: Melbourne 44-6 St Helens
2001: St Helens 20-18 Brisbane Broncos
2002: Bradford 41-22 Newcastle
2003: Sydney Roosters 38-0 St Helens
2004: Bradford 22-4 Penrith
2005: Leeds 39-32 Canterbury
2006: Bradford 30-10 Wests

We haven't won a WCC convincingly since 2006 and Leeds did a great job in 2012 over Manly. Honestly the all conquering 2015 Leeds side who got battered 38-4 against North Queensland would have been better suited playing the NRL teams of the early 2000's. But it's a different era. Both leagues have changed so much and the game itself is so different.

When I said more open play I didn't mean the 2016 Wigan played more openly than the 2005 teams. Rather that the game in 2005 was much more open than it is now, so the likes of Tomkins, Charnley etc would be able to exploit this more freely and with superior fitness would dominate the league. Watch highlights of matches from back then, especially the 2001-2005 era and you'll see just how open the field is compared to games now a days. But as you say as well the league as a whole is stronger.

Makes me wonder if the NRL is on steroids

Re: The SL Experiment : Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:50 pm  

Bulls Boy 2011 wrote:

Has the standard dropped? Or has the game changed in the way it is played. You put the 2016 Wigan Champions in the era of 2005 rugby league and they would blow everyone else out of the water, due to superior fitness and more open play. Alternatively you put one of the big teams of that era, say 2003 Wigan Warriors into this era of more structured rugby, they would get torn apart. Even by some of the mid-table teams now.

Sorry dont agree with that JJ. That Wigan team for me wouldnt get near this 2005 saints side

Paul Wellens
Ade Gardner
Jamie Lyon
Willie Talau
Darren Albert
Paul Sculthorpe
Sean Long
Nick Fozzard
Mick Higham
Paul Anderson
Lee Gilmour
James Graham
Jon Wilkin

James Roby
Keiron Cunningham
Mike Bennett
Mark Edmondson

Cant see it myself and this Wigan side 2002/2003

Kris Radlinski
Brian Carney
Gary Connolly
Jamie Ainscough
Brett Dallas
Julian O'Neill
Adrian Lam
Terry O'Connor
Terry Newton
Harvey Howard
Mick Cassidy
David Furner
Andy Farrell

Paul Johnson
Simon Haughton
Stephen Wild
Ricky Bibey

difference in quality is massive for me