WiganWarriorsFans.com

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.

To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.

John Ferguson wrote:

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.

To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.

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!!

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

John Ferguson wrote:

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.

To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.

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!!

Trust me he could not but hey ho.

cpwigan wrote:

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

John Ferguson wrote: To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.

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!!

Trust me he could not but hey ho.

Are you Marty McFly?

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?

cpwigan wrote:

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

John Ferguson wrote: To say Rads could not play fullback in today's game is ridiculous.

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!!

Trust me he could not but hey ho.

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!!

I agree with CP. Rads was my hero as a kid but he couldn't play fullback nowadays.

sheepsteeth wrote:I agree with CP. Rads was my hero as a kid but he couldn't play fullback nowadays.

Why?

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

sheepsteeth wrote:I agree with CP. Rads was my hero as a kid but he couldn't play fullback nowadays.

Why?

Because he's too old :eusa18:

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.

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.

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!

Even the Aussies have him down as a utility player

ELLA, Steve 1960-07-28 Fullback, Wing, Centre, Five-Eighth, Halfback, Bench played 156 Tries 94 Goals 104 FG 6 552

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.

Both players are not good examples of players moving early in their careers to fulfil the games changing tactics