You could be writing about my 29 years of life as a Newcastle United fan with that! My grandad (who died a couple of years ago) bought me some knock-off Newcastle United wine when he was on holiday in Europe about 15 years ago and said to open it when we win something. If I end up having kids and grandkids, maybe one of them will do so and die soon after having it, as it will have been like red, pickled vinegar..!

I agree with you tvoc. The Roy Francis team IMO was one of the very best Leeds has produced as was the fast offloading style of play. Despite starting with a talented squad it took Francis several years and an astute signing or two get the team to be able to play his attacking offloading style. Bit similar to the McDermott experience in a way

Indeed. But we must not forget that there were many players with tremendous individual skills which the modern game rarely produces perhaps because the modern game is based much more on physique. These same players would undoubtedly be stars today and would benefit from not having to put in 40 hours work per week before they trained and played.

However we should not try to suggest one era is better than the other even if we witnessed them personally.

Before my time. I think my first league games were the second and third tests in 1990 (one of my dads friends having dropped out at last minute and me getting the spare ticket) - you could say I got used to disappointment from an early age.

I did qualify 'best Leeds team ever' as the best I have seen (since 197icon_cool.gif. Although I had the pleasure of watching the great Alan Smith (Ryan Hall MK1), Les Dyl, John Atkinson, John Holmes etc I became a supporter too late to witness the team you describe. However, my dad used to wax lyrical about the players you mention such as Syd Hynes and Mick Shoebottom. His mate in his regular South Stand position was such a fan of Shoebottom he could never see any good in his successor? John Holmes. Very different players I understand...a pity I never got to see what 'all the fuss' was about. Above all others though my late dad never stopped telling me how good a player Lewis Jones was !!!! I do feel sad he never got to see this golden decade, but I guess his fond memories of players and the team you mention that I never witnessed would have made up for it.

Once in a generation indeed.

All the players you mentioned would be top stars if they played today I am sure and SL would be the richer for it.

I reckon the majority of great RL players would make it in any era. What I do think would change is the position some of them played.
I reckon Holmes, for example would have been a scrum half these days, and Atkinson may have been moved to FB, although I think of all the great players in that back line he'd have struggled the most because he wasn't the best defender or fielder of kicks... He was no Kieran Dixon, though

To be fair to Atky, by the time the last tackle "bomb" became prevalent (off the back of the 1978 Australian tour IIRC) he was coming towards the end of his career. Think he only played another couple of seasons at Leeds after that before heading off to Carlisle?

I'd imagine whether past players could've been successful in this era wouldn't so much be down to skill/ability.....but how well they'd do in terms of today's fitness/training and taking it seriously and going it right.

We still see players nowadays who don't let the fact they're full time professional RL players get in the way of a good drink. On the other side of the coin they could be guys who have disappointed in this era who would've been good in previous decades with the 'different' training/fitness regimes.

I personally cannot see us doing the treble. Especially with the super 8 format making it harder than ever to win. With the challenge cup so late in the season also makes it very difficult to peak so close together

Agree with this entirely... Risman, Smith, Hynes, Watson, Atkinson, Shoebottom, Seaborne, Clarke, Crosby, Ken Eyre, Albert Eyre, Ramsey and Batten. Redefined the sport and at times were simply jaw droppingly brilliant (CC Semi Final vs Wigan at Swinton Atkinson turning the great Billy Boston inside out comes to mind!

Current Leeds side certainly over the last 12 or so seasons the most successful we've ever had but that's not quite the same thing as being the greatest side we've ever had

I was there that afternoon in 1968 and that Leeds team broke my heart. They played a different type of rugby that was from another planet and far superior to an ageing Wigan team.
They were far and away the best team Leeds team I have ever seen and very few of the present team would have made their way into that team. Having said that Cuthbertson would fit perfectly into that style of play

Lets put even that in perspective though. That Leeds team won the CC in 68 which they could easily have lost but for Don Fox slipping. They didn't win the Championship until the following year, when they got knocked out in the CC.

I'm not trying to denigrate them, but there does tend to be a bit of rose tintedness with looking at the past.

Saying none of the current Leeds team would get into the 68 team is nonsense. If they were transported back in time today, none of the 68 team would be in, as physically current players are light years ahead. Bring the 68 team forward and you'd have the same result. Like I said, its simply not the same sport. Probably the closest you could come to that sort of comparison is the 82 Kangaroos, the first team of which genuinely were playing a different game to RL in England. They lost the scrums but smashed every team they played. The 82 Kangaroos would similarly be smashed if they played today.

I think you are missing the point.

I do not think there is a suggestion of time warping the 1968 team into 2015 complete with baggy shorts and heavy leather ball and full time job down the pit. For a start their aren't any pits now! Rather it was a comparison of skill and playing style which was streets ahead of anything in it's day.

It is impossible to compare different eras fairly for obvious reasons.

However IMO if the 1968 team were playing in SL now they would also benefit from the modern training and would be full timers. So you would have the 68's skill set and playing style v the current skill set and style with both teams having a more equal fitness if not size. Then I am sure you would see that skill and ability would trump size and power. Not that our current team lacks skill and ability it is just that the way the 68 team made the ball work with brilliant lines of running and with great pace.

The 68 CC final was the water splash final which I attended. Wakefield scored a try because the ball stopped and skidded in a huge pool of water and would otherwise have been fielded by Atkinson. So the conditions ruined the game if not the excitement so for either side to win was a lottery. On a dry ground Leeds should have won in style. But the comment was not about trophies but best side more to do with playing style and skills.

I guess had you witnessed this side play you might also have rose tinted memories as they were so good. The discussion was about skill and playing style. Had the 68 side been playing now they would have benefited from current fitness training and had you transported the current side back to 68 so they too would have been full time workers and 2 nights a week trainers. So are left with skills and physiques to compare. I prefer to say both sides are up there with the very best.

By the way if you saw the 82 Kangaroos you will have got a glimpse of how Leeds played under Francis but we had the advantage of having a good pack too! So it is not true to say these Kangaroos were the first team to play a different game to RL in England.

The 82 Kangeroos would wipe the floor with any team today.
Compare 1 to 13 with the current Aussie team and it's a no contest.
They probably can't wrestle as well as today's players but in terms of skill it is a no brainer.

It is of course impossible to compare era's.

For example would someone like schoey have knuckled down as a full time pro or would, regardless of talent he have been limited to lesser teams.

Also I think people underestimate how much the advances in fitness of conditioning of modern players. For example Inglis would literally be head and shoulders over any back from the 80s (even "big" mal) whilst also probably being quicker than most.

It's also not just GI. The likes of Watkins and Hall are also bigger than "big mal" yet in the 80s he stood out like some kind of monster.

That's the point I was making Omar. Its too easy to say a star of any era could make it in any other. Some from previous eras would simply not hack it because even with training etc they wouldn't be physically up to it. Suggesting some 13 stone forward from another era would be just as good today with an extra stone or so of muscle is plain silly. If you go back further there were 7 stone halfbacks around. Rob Burrow weighs 11 stone and is tiny.

Itchy - I disagree about skills. The 82 Roos were light years ahead of us at that time, but if you watch games from that era they were facing far weaker defences. Lewis was the only player with a long spin pass back then - now every halfback going can do it. I keep forgetting who makes this point around here, but the general skill level now is far higher than in 82 in terms of basic passing, and the defences are immeasurably better. I'd argue a fair few Roos of today would be in the 82 side - Slater, Inglis, Cam Smith and Thurston (yes I'd say he's better than Sterlo) for a start. Even from Leeds Hardaker and Watkins would be in as well, and probably both Briscoe and Hall.

Not one forward?
We will have to disagree.
A couple of points though - how would today's forwards cope with 8o minutes? I would take Maninga sterling Kenny Lewis Rogers Grothe Miles over any player in the modern era.
Just an opinion but obviously have great respect for Inglis Slater et al.
As an aside I thought Krillich (sp?) was superb and a fantastic captain and would always be in my all time 13.

As good as Krilich was as a leader, there were arguments in Australia at the time over whether he was their best hooker. Not the most mobile or the most skillful you'll ever see at the position by a distance, but the way the game was played at that time didn't demand him to be.

The likes of Wayne Pearce looked impressive because in terms of conditioning and athletic ability they were changing the template for what rugby league players looked like. Now back-rowers are expected to be like that. Similarly with Meninga and Miles redefining the physical template for centres, Grothe for wingers etc.

Great RL players would be great players in any era, regardless of weather they play the game now, or in the past. I do think the positions some players play, or played would be different because the skill set required in certain positions was very different then, and it's very different now.

As for the overall standard, I don't think the standards or skills have dropped at all. Where I think the game has changed is that players today have a lot less time on the ball, and less space to accurately execute there skills. When you look at the game from the 20th century what's noticeable is how 'broken' the defensive lines were, and how few players were involved in the tackle. Also, the likes of Andy Gregory used to crab across the field and looking for gaps, I think if he tried that so often in todays game he'd more often than not got smashed by the advancing defence. I'm not saying that he wouldn't have been a great player now, he was a very skilful player, but I do think he would have to adapt his game significantly to succeed, not to mention his lifestyle.

Personally, I love the game as much as ever. It's totally different to when I started watching it, but that doesn't mean it's not fun to watch. Granted there's some dross served up each week, but that's ALWAYS been the case in any sport.

He'd have to have learned to pass both ways without having to turn his back to the defensive line for a start...

Remember that in 82 Lewis & Rogers who were first choice halfbacks and who were both exceptional players ended up playing with the mid week team! It would be like Thurston and say Slater chosen to tour and not getting any caps whilst on tour. It just wouldn't happen despite the alledged strength in depth of superstars.
I am to a degree I know looking through rose tinted glasses however, that 82 team is the only team other my own that I actually went to see whenever I could they were that good. I went to all 3 test matches when the silence of the crowds at times was deafening when they cut the GB to ribbons and went to I think all other matches held in Lancashire on that tour.
A great team that arises once in a lifetime.

AG I remember at the time thinking who the bloody hell could better than Krillich!
I think Radonakuis( sp?) may have the favourite with the Aussie press to get the number 9 jersey?
I am a believer that a great captain can be the difference between a good team and a great team as Sinfield has shown over the last decade or so.

Queensland s Mark Murray came over as first choice scrum half, Steve Rogers was a centre