Please go Back And Read again!

The elite players produced by this competition are no nearer (And IMHO further away) from their Southern Hemisphere Counterparts than they were 15 years ago!

SL and it's supposed increased competitiveness would prepare our players better and produce better results in the ultimate test, International Rugby!

Has it done that???? I won't insult you be giving you the answer as deep down you know the answer really.

It comes down to this

Success of the SL Competition and the success of the International team have almost NO bearing on each other!
This has been proved in the Premier League and in SL IMHO.

The Premier league is the "Best" League int he world supposedly but are the National team any better than they were in 1990???
Are they Hell !

Are the players in the current international team any better than their predeccessors at both sports??
Are they Hell !

Would the GB team of 90/92 beat the team of today??
Course they would! and if you fool yourself otherwise and talk about fitness then basically all your saying is that whatever team Saints/Leeds/Wigan have in 20 years they will be better than the current teams because their Fitter. They may be be, but they won't be Better!

Steadman
Hampson
Lydon
Offiah
Davies
Schofield
Newlove
Connolly
Deveraux
Powell
Hulme
Edwards
Gregory


V


Wellens
Sykes
Gardner
Senior
Gleeson
Calderwood
Smith
Burrow
Pryce
McGuire

Yeah, I know who I'm Backing!

Yeah, the team with 13 players

The Point my Friend, is that 15 or so years ago we had far more Quality players vying for International jerseys (certainly in the Backs that's why I highlighted them) than we have now!
IMHO they were also closer to their Aus Counterparts!

Whatever the

was for I'm not sure but if you would like a resoned debate then expand your thoughts a touch further if that's possible???

AJ,
To highlight it even further you have missed Bateman, Ellis and Goulding off you list.

And probably Many More! TBH I Couldn't think of Many More for the Current GB Team!



Yeaman??
Raynor (Probably should have out him in)
And then a Whole Host of untested players who IMHO wouldn't bridge the gap at all.

Connolly?? Newlove??? Powell??? P- lease! They may have good for their clubs but they were poor for GB/England. Senior, Gleeson, McGuire, and even Burrow have performed better than they did at test level. Even Edwards (again, class in a dominent Wigan team) did nothing at test level (apart from deck Bradley Clyde.

And Davies is Welsh!

On top of that, just how bad would have been all those years ago if wern't able to bring in the best Union backs over like now?

I don't thinks it all as cut and dry as that, the game has changed an awful lot in that time, there no doubting that the modern players are a lot fitter and faster, who’s to say that the 80s/90s players could keep up with the pace of the modern game for 80mins.

Maybe they looked more skillful because they had more time on the ball (think Long, McGuire, Pryce in the SL compared to International).

And who's to say that we have a god given right to have the most naturally skillful players in the world, we could swap entire coaching and youth development systems with the Aussies but if the raw natural talent isn't there then we will always be second best.

But were they not just as fit?
Don't forget they played more game time, none of this 12 interchange rule.

You're halfway there. Gregory, Edwards and Hanley are a massive gulf in class away from your players currently occupying those positions.

The reverse applies to those from Leeds; their current 6, 7 & 13 are better than those filling similar slots back then.

You could be right and proving either is a pointless fog knitting exercise but IMO just from watching the game I think today’s players are fitter.

and yet, those guys never won anything at international level either. The current crop may not be much good (in your opinion) but in terms of achievements, they are on a par with every player you have listed there.

This is an impossible argument,

however i think it is apparent that we had more depth back in the day than we do now! And that was always seen as a problem back then.

I dont think past players are 'better' than modern day players, however it would be interesting to see someone like Hanley, with all the modern day methods.

One thing i think is true though, is that as a whole the 'skill level' is down on the 80/90's

We as a sport are still suffering from the bigger the better mentality of the turn of the century teams, with what is nothing more than a second row in each position, and a scrum half/stand off who can play a bit.

The sport has gone backwards in my opinion in skill, however it should have improved due to summer rugby meaning we didnt have to play on muddy pitches in the middle of winter.

And How Many of our players are coveted by the Aussies Down Under????

Not Many!

Back then they would Have snatched our hands off for a dozen of our players!

SL players earn far more playing in SL than they would to play in the NRL. 20 years ago it didn't matter because the seasons ran at separate times of the year

And if it was the same as 15 years ago, How many would they come for splashing Decent Money At???

Well Jordan Tansey, Ian Sibbit, Chris Thorman, Keith Mason, RICHIE MATHERS, Gareth Ellis, Adrien Morley have all gone to the NRL in recent years so I'm guessing theres a fair few who could go to the NRL if they wanted to go.

5 of those are average at best as proved by themselves in the NRL and SL.

Thats my point. If players of that standard can get an NRL gig I'm sure SLs top British players could.

(I forgot to mention Carney as well whom was the top winger in the NRL when over there)

Connolly and Newlove, two of the best centres this country has ever produced and never once let GB down. And you're saying Senior and Gleeson have performed better than they did at test level?! Not sure what Davies being Welsh has to do with anything. I think you need to ask your friends to do some more research for you.

isn't wales in great britain?

Connolly scored 1 try in 30(?) tests when he was nearly 33. Both him and Newlove were class for their clubs but looked out of their depth at test level, in Newlove's case I think it was more to do with the fact he couldn't be d.

Where as Senior, has a man of the series award to his name and was named one of the best 2 centres in the world over 3 or 4 years.

Davies being Welsh means (obviously) that he wouldn't get into the ENGLAND team.

Aye, but he's Welsh so therefore couldn't be selected for England, so to say he'd get in the England team before the likes of Senior or Gleeson or Pryce is wrong.

i never said he would!

did someone say fa'asavalu?

I never said you said he would, but I assumed becuase jukesays thought he would. And we all know Fa'asavalu is more English than Davies

how dare you cast aspertions on the eligibilty of mary!