New School vs Old School

All things related to the Castleford Tigers.
Post Reply
User avatar
Skip
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1545
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 21:03
Location: At the computer.
Contact:

New School vs Old School

Post by Skip » 25 Jun 2008, 17:17

I'll pose a question for you all:

Which was/is better?

The days when players weren't all sculpted, but hard as nails

Or...

Todays players who are sculpted, yet are seemingly more prone to injury?

Discuss.
Why do today what you can put off till tomorrow?

There is a thin line between insanity and genius. I walk that line every day.

User avatar
The Happy Hooker
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 528
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 16:16
Location: Usually found between open side and blind side prop
Contact:

Re: New School vs Old School

Post by The Happy Hooker » 25 Jun 2008, 17:27

Skip wrote:I'll pose a question for you all:

Which was/is better?

The days when players weren't all sculpted, but hard as nails

Or...

Todays players who are sculpted, yet are seemingly more prone to injury?

Discuss.
Forgive me, but I'm not sure what sculpted means???????

perhaps this:http://www.sculpted.co.uk/
Image
We await his second coming, Chuck Hardisty MkII

"It does not require many words to speak the truth"...Chief Joseph, Nez Perce

User avatar
Skip
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1545
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 21:03
Location: At the computer.
Contact:

Post by Skip » 25 Jun 2008, 17:30

As in thinner, carrying less body fat - looking more muscular.

I should have said 'The tight t-shirt brigade vs the old school player'

That would have probably sorted it.
Why do today what you can put off till tomorrow?

There is a thin line between insanity and genius. I walk that line every day.

User avatar
Danny Boy
Verified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4620
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 21:13
Contact:

Post by Danny Boy » 25 Jun 2008, 17:41

It's a funny one is that, believe it or not Michael Atherton was talking to ian Botham about the self same subject at a recent England game.
It seems cricket has the same problem, more players injured than ever, but cricketers looking the part and much fitter.

There were injuries in the old days (when players played many more games) but seemingly not half as many as is the case now, also players careers are shorter these days, not sure if all this is connected to superior fitness regimes, summer rugby or possibly the number of high impact collisions in modern rugby league?
Danny Boy

User avatar
Dirk Diggler
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1996
Joined: 05 Jul 2006, 21:41
Location: Castleford
Contact:

Post by Dirk Diggler » 25 Jun 2008, 17:50

All I will say is 'Bring back the Biff'!!!

:lol: :dance: :lol:
Image
Long Live The Monkey Munch!!!

Bomber
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1123
Joined: 09 Aug 2007, 23:01
Contact:

Post by Bomber » 25 Jun 2008, 17:53

More injuries in todays modern game due to the ferocity of the collisions created by the players being full timers and the move from 5 to 10 metres, to me this made our game more about physical strength and took away many of the skills many of yesteryears players had.
Wonder how such a talented ball player like Barry Johnson would have gone on in todays game\?

WHELDON-ROAD-END
Championship Player
Championship Player
Posts: 8267
Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 17:14
Location: Castleford
Contact:

Post by WHELDON-ROAD-END » 25 Jun 2008, 19:24

Players have got it easy now, its not like back in day where if you hit some one off ball you'd be put on report, you just had to get up, laugh about it and get on with game.

User avatar
cutsyke tiger
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1383
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 00:49
Contact:

Post by cutsyke tiger » 25 Jun 2008, 20:17

Bomber wrote:More injuries in todays modern game due to the ferocity of the collisions created by the players being full timers and the move from 5 to 10 metres, to me this made our game more about physical strength and took away many of the skills many of yesteryears players had.
Wonder how such a talented ball player like Barry Johnson would have gone on in todays game\?
Are you kidding more ferocious today i guess you never watched some of the old ones like frank foster who would have took your head off as look at you someone mentioned in a previous post bailey at leeds is a thug well he is a pussycat compared to such as rocky turner and karalius jack wilkison etc i could go on all night but unfortunatley it is all in the past so no way of comparing but my views are it was a lot harder then than now

User avatar
Normy Knight
Championship Player
Championship Player
Posts: 8407
Joined: 07 Jul 2006, 20:49
Location: Chilling.
Contact:

Re: New School vs Old School

Post by Normy Knight » 25 Jun 2008, 22:22

Skip wrote:I'll pose a question for you all:

Which was/is better?

The days when players weren't all sculpted, but hard as nails

Or...

Todays players who are sculpted, yet are seemingly more prone to injury?

Discuss.
Yesterdays players were harder, due maybe to more body mass and the physicality of their daytime jobs.

Most if not all worked down the pit, or had a building job with the council. Manual labour, which now is replaced by working in a gym which imo is not a suitable replacement.

Look at RU, the Welsh in the 70,s and 80's were unbeatable most came from a working class back-ground, then it went to Uni people, doctors and lawyers, low and behold the standard dropped.

There are similarities even in both codes, the props of today maybe faster and leaner but put them up against yesteryear props, I know where my money would be.

Look at the interchanges nowadays, did'nt have all those in the past. Technically the game has moved forward, physically I think they may have taken a step backwards.

I ask you a question? Which of todays props in SL could handle Kevin Ward in his prime?
Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.
http://www.normantonknights.co.uk

User avatar
Wicksy
Championship Player
Championship Player
Posts: 5742
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 10:06
Location: Carleton
Contact:

Re: New School vs Old School

Post by Wicksy » 25 Jun 2008, 22:40

Normy Knight wrote:
Skip wrote:I'll pose a question for you all:

Which was/is better?

The days when players weren't all sculpted, but hard as nails

Or...

Todays players who are sculpted, yet are seemingly more prone to injury?

Discuss.
Yesterdays players were harder, due maybe to more body mass and the physicality of their daytime jobs.

Most if not all worked down the pit, or had a building job with the council. Manual labour, which now is replaced by working in a gym which imo is not a suitable replacement.

Look at RU, the Welsh in the 70,s and 80's were unbeatable most came from a working class back-ground, then it went to Uni people, doctors and lawyers, low and behold the standard dropped.

There are similarities even in both codes, the props of today maybe faster and leaner but put them up against yesteryear props, I know where my money would be.

Look at the interchanges nowadays, did'nt have all those in the past. Technically the game has moved forward, physically I think they may have taken a step backwards.

I ask you a question? Which of todays props in SL could handle Kevin Ward in his prime?
Not Many . Todays players are to sharp but that's the way it is now .
Image

Maybe they don't want to stand down because they want to rectify the mistakes they've made in seasons gone by.

User avatar
Normy Knight
Championship Player
Championship Player
Posts: 8407
Joined: 07 Jul 2006, 20:49
Location: Chilling.
Contact:

Re: New School vs Old School

Post by Normy Knight » 25 Jun 2008, 22:50

Wicksy wrote:
Normy Knight wrote:
Skip wrote:I'll pose a question for you all:

Which was/is better?

The days when players weren't all sculpted, but hard as nails

Or...

Todays players who are sculpted, yet are seemingly more prone to injury?

Discuss.
Yesterdays players were harder, due maybe to more body mass and the physicality of their daytime jobs.

Most if not all worked down the pit, or had a building job with the council. Manual labour, which now is replaced by working in a gym which imo is not a suitable replacement.

Look at RU, the Welsh in the 70,s and 80's were unbeatable most came from a working class back-ground, then it went to Uni people, doctors and lawyers, low and behold the standard dropped.

There are similarities even in both codes, the props of today maybe faster and leaner but put them up against yesteryear props, I know where my money would be.

Look at the interchanges nowadays, did'nt have all those in the past. Technically the game has moved forward, physically I think they may have taken a step backwards.

I ask you a question? Which of todays props in SL could handle Kevin Ward in his prime?
Not Many . Todays players are to sharp but that's the way it is now .
Wicksey, he would bury all of them in the first tackle. There is'nt 1 that could lace his boots.
Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.
http://www.normantonknights.co.uk

User avatar
Flat Capper
Grand Final Winner
Grand Final Winner
Posts: 15173
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 00:10
Location: Where ever I lay my fat
Contact:

Post by Flat Capper » 25 Jun 2008, 23:45

No surprise at the responses so far, old school supporters think it was tougher then.

I have touched on this subject before and firmly believe the modern players have a far greater body muscle mass, the combined impact at an obviously quicker pace means the modern player receives far more damage.

I actually believe the greater muscle mass has had an impact on both the bone structure and the ligaments that surround the joints, neither of which have evolved at the pace the main muscle areas have.

The old lads though had to withstand all the skullduggery of the old game where violence was part and parcel of the beast (and indeed provided a great deal of entertainment for the fans).

In essence, I think the modern day player is equally as tough as old school but for different reasons.
Image
Spreading the Cas gene pool

User avatar
tallguyx
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1096
Joined: 20 Mar 2008, 17:48
Contact:

Post by tallguyx » 26 Jun 2008, 07:30

I think modern RL players are a million times softer than the old school equivalent.However the current players would come out on top in a game as the sport has moved on (summer rugby,fitness etc). I agree with the post above about kevin ward though, his all round game would have been perfect especially with the interchange.

User avatar
Skip
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1545
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 21:03
Location: At the computer.
Contact:

Post by Skip » 26 Jun 2008, 08:44

My personal opinion is that as much as the game has gone forward regarding fitness, there is a lot to look back on from the past as genuine ways to improve.

Not firstly being the fact that players back in the past didn't have so much free time outside of training. It is really a big thing, as all that free time is not really conducive to making players rock solid, durable players. Old school players used to combine training and playing with manual labour... Which made them much more durable.

In fact... Take a look at the number of injuries in SL this year, then look at NL1/NL2. Arguably the teams that aren't full time have suffered far less injuries - what does that tell you? I know, the standard is lower - but the collisions across the divisions are not much different.

To be honest the players should be doing 40 hours a week, training and playing. You can bet that most current players are doing nowhere near that. And people wonder why players aren't fit/durable/etc.

I think if the old school were playing in todays game, they would find things to do at the club instead of wasting their time stood around xscape gabbing with each other, etc.

Can you imagine the look on some of todays players faces if they were told 'go paint the seated stand'? Their faces would drop. Yesteryears player would just go 'where's the paint?'

I think the obsession with players carrying less body fat on them is also a bit of a false economy. Yes, they're faster and don't tire as quickly (though that's debatable). But the impact that the players have to put up with really necessitates (sp?) carrying that extra padding to absorb the impact. Without it, they are much more likely to get injured. Their time would be better spent making themselves stronger and increase their endurance so that they can still have that power, not tire themselves out and be able to take the hits.

I agree that todays game has become harder - but our players have not. And that's where the problem lies for me.
Why do today what you can put off till tomorrow?

There is a thin line between insanity and genius. I walk that line every day.

TDT
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 635
Joined: 20 Oct 2006, 09:49
Contact:

Post by TDT » 26 Jun 2008, 12:17

What do we mean by tough or hard?

If you put the six so called toughest modern players against the six toughest from any team from the 50's 60's or 70's in a fight against each other the old school would win every time.

The old school were big strong tough men who could all handle themselves. They didn't have a choice, because if they couldn't, someone would take advantage.

The modern player would no doubt be able to bench press more and be quicker and leaner than the old school, but I still think the old school were actually stronger.

I would like to see the 5 yards brought back, so we could see a bit of skill to break a defense down rather than battering rams powering their way through.

Just a thought for you. Some of this weeks England team are talking about doubling up this weekend as though it is something special.

Now I remember when the floodlight trophy was on in the 70's and most of the Cas team did a full shift of hard graft down the pit on Friday before cleaning themselves up and playing 80 minutes for Cas. Not 20 minutes in the first half and 20 Minutes in the second half, the full 80 Minutes. Now that is what I call doubling up.

TDT
My favourite colours are Black & Amber.

User avatar
Skip
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 1545
Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 21:03
Location: At the computer.
Contact:

Post by Skip » 26 Jun 2008, 12:37

I completely agree about the doubling up point TDT - Good point well made.
Why do today what you can put off till tomorrow?

There is a thin line between insanity and genius. I walk that line every day.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], BradfordTiger, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 88 guests