To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.cpwigan wrote:
The game changes and the coaches adapt as they see fit. Hanpo / Rads etc none could play FB as required today. Neither could George Fairbairn / Mick Burke / Keith Mumby but every one could catch the odd bomb so I guess that makes them FBs.
Wigan in talks to keep Green
-
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 6:28 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
- TrueBlueWarrior
- Posts: 6171
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
Rads could play FB in any era in any team with any style of play! Maybe the FB role is evolving so the type of FB Rads was isn't as sought after today but great players adapt and Rads was certainly that!!John Ferguson wrote:To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.cpwigan wrote:
The game changes and the coaches adapt as they see fit. Hanpo / Rads etc none could play FB as required today. Neither could George Fairbairn / Mick Burke / Keith Mumby but every one could catch the odd bomb so I guess that makes them FBs.
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
Trust me he could not but hey ho.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Rads could play FB in any era in any team with any style of play! Maybe the FB role is evolving so the type of FB Rads was isn't as sought after today but great players adapt and Rads was certainly that!!John Ferguson wrote:To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.cpwigan wrote:
The game changes and the coaches adapt as they see fit. Hanpo / Rads etc none could play FB as required today. Neither could George Fairbairn / Mick Burke / Keith Mumby but every one could catch the odd bomb so I guess that makes them FBs.
-
- Posts: 5416
- Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:38 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
Are you Marty McFly?cpwigan wrote:Trust me he could not but hey ho.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Rads could play FB in any era in any team with any style of play! Maybe the FB role is evolving so the type of FB Rads was isn't as sought after today but great players adapt and Rads was certainly that!!John Ferguson wrote: To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.
Not sure of this time-jumping but I am sure each quality player would have held their own with the right training/environment as current players enjoy
As you indicate yourself with the famous Parramatta side of the early eighties, those players were interject-able into multiple positions but I'm not sure that would work with those same players in the modern era - or would you now like to contradict yourself?
[img]http://www.webdeveloper.com/animations/ ... monkey.gif[/img]
The biggest Room is the Room for improvement.
The best form of defence is attack!!
Out of the black and into the red, remember you don't get anything for two in a bed!!
The biggest Room is the Room for improvement.
The best form of defence is attack!!
Out of the black and into the red, remember you don't get anything for two in a bed!!
- TrueBlueWarrior
- Posts: 6171
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
Let me get this straight, you are seriously saying Kris Radlinski could not play FB in the current game? I just want a straight yes or no answer before I respond because I am mystified!!cpwigan wrote:Trust me he could not but hey ho.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Rads could play FB in any era in any team with any style of play! Maybe the FB role is evolving so the type of FB Rads was isn't as sought after today but great players adapt and Rads was certainly that!!John Ferguson wrote: To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
-
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:02 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
I agree with CP. Rads was my hero as a kid but he couldn't play fullback nowadays.
- TrueBlueWarrior
- Posts: 6171
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
Why?sheepsteeth wrote:I agree with CP. Rads was my hero as a kid but he couldn't play fullback nowadays.
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
-
- Posts: 5416
- Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:38 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
Because he's too old :eusa18:TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Why?sheepsteeth wrote:I agree with CP. Rads was my hero as a kid but he couldn't play fullback nowadays.
[img]http://www.webdeveloper.com/animations/ ... monkey.gif[/img]
The biggest Room is the Room for improvement.
The best form of defence is attack!!
Out of the black and into the red, remember you don't get anything for two in a bed!!
The biggest Room is the Room for improvement.
The best form of defence is attack!!
Out of the black and into the red, remember you don't get anything for two in a bed!!
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
I will answer both of you. Rads was a great FB for his time as were many others but Rads was a runner / an outside back type of player which is why he started on the wing.
Today, a FB is an extra half back and Rads was never a half back nor did he have those skills and nor could he have developed them. I used Steve Ella as an example of how the FB role was already slowly evolving. Phil Blake was another early example of a half back moving to FB. IIRC, Billy Slater was originally a half back as a junior.
Rads was a great of his era for Wigan but in terms of becoming the key pivot like Sam T or even like Rocky he could not hold a candle to either and yes he did other things better / much better than they could BUT we are talking now and he would not have even been selected at FB IMO. Far more likely wing or centre.
Today, a FB is an extra half back and Rads was never a half back nor did he have those skills and nor could he have developed them. I used Steve Ella as an example of how the FB role was already slowly evolving. Phil Blake was another early example of a half back moving to FB. IIRC, Billy Slater was originally a half back as a junior.
Rads was a great of his era for Wigan but in terms of becoming the key pivot like Sam T or even like Rocky he could not hold a candle to either and yes he did other things better / much better than they could BUT we are talking now and he would not have even been selected at FB IMO. Far more likely wing or centre.
-
- Posts: 5416
- Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:38 pm
Re: Wigan in talks to keep Green
You mention Steve Ella as "an example" of the future positional changes we now see, yet how many times exactly (barring injury) did Paul Taylor get replaced by Steve Ella? Even the great Jack Gibson knew were to play Ella and it was not full back in precedence over Taylor!cpwigan wrote:I used Steve Ella as an example of how the FB role was already slowly evolving. Phil Blake was another early example of a half back moving to FB. IIRC, Billy Slater was originally a half back as a junior.
Even the Aussies have him down as a utility player
Phil Blake was very similar to Ella, but his main position in his early career was as a half back, but he too was often seen for his utility value and played most of his time in the centres. Only when he joined the Auckland Warriors did he play full back and by then he was at the end of his playing time.ELLA, Steve 1960-07-28 Fullback, Wing, Centre, Five-Eighth, Halfback, Bench played 156 Tries 94 Goals 104 FG 6 552
Both players are not good examples of players moving early in their careers to fulfil the games changing tactics
[img]http://www.webdeveloper.com/animations/ ... monkey.gif[/img]
The biggest Room is the Room for improvement.
The best form of defence is attack!!
Out of the black and into the red, remember you don't get anything for two in a bed!!
The biggest Room is the Room for improvement.
The best form of defence is attack!!
Out of the black and into the red, remember you don't get anything for two in a bed!!