It's just an excuse used by others wearing opposition colours (Wigan were the only full-time team). The new one is (2024) the teams in the league are poor and Wigan have nothing to beat. It just makes winning all that more sweet.DaveO wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 12:09 pmNkt this they bought the trophies again. That is a myth peddled by other teams fans. Leeds were full time by then and most other teams at the top such as Saints had players whose only job was playing RL. There were very few semi pro players in the top sides.fozzie58 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 11:43 am You can’t compare eras and for me it’s silly to try I’d say this it was easy buying a full time team in a part time sport and bulldoze teams but for me the way Wigan have brought so many kids through and bought very wisely from the top table of talent means for me is a much bigger achievement
In any case it is arguable that the opposition was closer to winning then than now. I can’t remember if it was 94 but one season Warrington beat Wigan home and away and those were the only two games Wigan lost. Des Drummond was playing for 5em at the time. Warrington were a far better side then than in recent seasons.
Then there was Widnes before that who enticed top RU internationals from Wales such as Devereux and Davis as well as having home grown talent like Myler and others.
The idea the sport was part time by 94 is nuts.
Ok: 1994 or 2024?
-
- Posts: 5111
- Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2020 1:14 pm
Re: Ok: 1994 or 2024?
-
- Posts: 2785
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 1:18 pm
Re: Ok: 1994 or 2024?
I am not sure what we are to be debating here. If it is which team would be likely to win then I suspect 1994 if they both trained equally hard.
If it is which is the better achievement then I would make a strong case for 2024, in part because they are the weaker team, and in part because they faced 9 teams spending close to the same, all of whom were full time.
Another point I would stress is how few of our current team were bought in as existing stars - arguable only Thompson and even he had some question marks over his form/fitness. Field, French and Ellis have been transformed by Peet, Wardle has got better and better, and of our first choice 17 Marshall, Smith, Harvard, O’Neill, Faz, Nsemba and Byrne are all home grown.
I enjoyed watching both teams but this feels more special as they had to get ao close to their full potential so often over such a long period to win the lot.
If it is which is the better achievement then I would make a strong case for 2024, in part because they are the weaker team, and in part because they faced 9 teams spending close to the same, all of whom were full time.
Another point I would stress is how few of our current team were bought in as existing stars - arguable only Thompson and even he had some question marks over his form/fitness. Field, French and Ellis have been transformed by Peet, Wardle has got better and better, and of our first choice 17 Marshall, Smith, Harvard, O’Neill, Faz, Nsemba and Byrne are all home grown.
I enjoyed watching both teams but this feels more special as they had to get ao close to their full potential so often over such a long period to win the lot.
Re: Ok: 1994 or 2024?
Couldn't agree more. Field, and French in particular, are twice the players now that they were in the NRL. And then adding in all our home-grown talent, we are in a good place.
-
- Posts: 1808
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 2:13 pm
Re: Ok: 1994 or 2024?
SL is more suited to French and Field.
Horses for courses.
Horses for courses.
-
- Posts: 3775
- Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2003 9:42 pm
Re: Ok: 1994 or 2024?
Yes FozzieCharriots Offiah wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 12:22 pmIt's just an excuse used by others wearing opposition colours (Wigan were the only full-time team). The new one is (2024) the teams in the league are poor and Wigan have nothing to beat. It just makes winning all that more sweet.DaveO wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 12:09 pmNkt this they bought the trophies again. That is a myth peddled by other teams fans. Leeds were full time by then and most other teams at the top such as Saints had players whose only job was playing RL. There were very few semi pro players in the top sides.fozzie58 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 11:43 am You can’t compare eras and for me it’s silly to try I’d say this it was easy buying a full time team in a part time sport and bulldoze teams but for me the way Wigan have brought so many kids through and bought very wisely from the top table of talent means for me is a much bigger achievement
In any case it is arguable that the opposition was closer to winning then than now. I can’t remember if it was 94 but one season Warrington beat Wigan home and away and those were the only two games Wigan lost. Des Drummond was playing for 5em at the time. Warrington were a far better side then than in recent seasons.
Then there was Widnes before that who enticed top RU internationals from Wales such as Devereux and Davis as well as having home grown talent like Myler and others.
The idea the sport was part time by 94 is nuts.
Wire twice beat us but I remember both defeats were down to Frano Botica, justifiably remembered as a wonderful goal kicker, who in both games home and away, missed all the conversion attempts and even though we scored more tries than Wire these missed goal kicks were the killer blow.
Regarder une fille en bikini, c'est comme avoir un revolver chargé sur sa table:
Il n'y a rien de mal a ça mais il est difficile de penser à autre chose.
Now Europe is just for holidays.
Il n'y a rien de mal a ça mais il est difficile de penser à autre chose.
Now Europe is just for holidays.