Which Australian rugby league side is better?

Sheek- did Wally dominate many GFs the way Bert did? Qld had a good run in SOO during the 80's. Having a non neutral ref didn't harm the cause. I reckon the Grasshopper would have pipped Wal for MOTM most occasions as Shayne should have streeted DCE last year for the Churchill.

Wigan Hull KR Leeds Cumbria GB Halifax St. Helens Oldham GB Widnes Hull Bradford GB President's XIII France Le Pontet (prov) Midi Pyrenees France B Villeneuve France For any Kangaroo, they were 20 demanding games.

So David Lord has read some history on the game.

its funny how current players complain about the number of games, terry lamb featured in all 20 of the games on the Kangaroo tour

good point. Mitchell Pearce is bigger than his father from that era and he was a lock/second rower

All the Kenny fans seem to use the 1982 tour as "evidence" that Kenny was a superior 5/8 to Lewis, despite the fact that Lewis far more dominant far more often in their respective careers. The Kenny fans also seem to ignore the fact that Lewis had a personality clash with 1982 coach Stanton, which affected his selection. Finally, Lewis was "big game player". Like his Australian rugby schoolmate Mark Ella for the Wallabies, Lewis wasn't a great trainer. He saved himself for the big matches in which he usually excelled. That's the mark of greatness, dominating the big matches.

John, Let me put this another way. If you're going to have a match-up between the 2014 & 1982 Kangaroos, then you have to bring them level, whether you play in 2014 or 1982. If you play in 2014, then the 1982 Roos would be brought up to equivalent size & speed of today. Or if you play in 1982, then the 2014 Roos would be reduced in size & strength to what it was back then. That's how it works. Skill level then becomes the determining factor.

I go back further Boom where a first half replacement was allowed for injuries only. If a player was injured in the second half, the team had to play a man short. The substitutes rule was good and fixed that up. Far better than the current interchange.

The Immortals have become something that recently retired players get nominated to be part of. Much of this comes from the press who at least once a week come up with so & so is .a future immortal. I was never happy about Johns being an Immortal but they changed the rules to rule out indiscretions off the field. We have some great players but I don't see any Immortals yet.

Despite all the talk of the current game being faster, I still prefer earlier days, where there were two substitutes and fatigue was a real factor. The game was just as fast and open with the 5m rule and there were no video refs or a second on field Muppet to interfere. It's always difficult crossing eras, although with my rose tinted glasses on, I still love watching my old DVD of the 1985 Challenge Cup Final with opposing Australian halfbacks Brett Kenny and Peter Sterling. Enjoy the condensed version here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3IbRSI1io

It is hard to compare the two because of the eras. It is such a level playing field today, with all players professional and bulked up super athletes. The 1982-86 Roos were an example of natural ability and skill that stood out in a sport of semi-professionals - no 100kg+ centres, just blokes who worked during the day and trained a few times a week who were naturally super gifted. Watch the old footage - The likes of kenny, Meninga, Lamb, Ella, Price, Cronin, Boyd were just brilliant. Naturally gifted without the bells and whistles of today's era.

I agree with what you say. You might be right about Cam Smith, but he is so tough and strong, I think he could have played hooker. But no arguments with re Steve Walters.You could pick a number of combinations over the last 50 years, there is probably not a struck match between them. Guys from any era, pretty much any outstanding back would do well today, Forwards a different story, someone like Beetson, would do really well now, because of Interchange. To me players like Coote/Macca were prototype modern day back rowers anyway..

Rod - i don't think Smith cuts it as a hooker in sixties League.Back in those days a hookers main role was to win scrums anything beyond that was a bonus and hookers were big thickset men who could add weight to the scrums not an era for a man like Smith. Steve Walters yeh would have been a star but Smith probably ends up in intensive care and then gets retrained as a half back.

Rod - picking these type of teams is just so hard because the game has changed so much but like any sport all you can do is dominate in the era in which you play. Beetson would have to be one prop..people talk about his ball skills but forget in his younger days he was incredibly fast agile and mobile for a forward of that era...he was a centre to begin with. I actually rate Glen Lazurus very highly whatever club he played for by strange coincidence seemed to win the comp also I think Lazurus is a star in any era. Hooker is almost pointless because the nature of the position has changed so much.Smith would not have cut it in Walters era and probably vice versa. Wally Lewis is a no brainer at five eight...despite what the romantics longing for the long gone glory days of test football may say origin is the yardstick of the modern era and Lewis dominated it for nearly a decade - as Warren Ryan said that is one hell of a player. I think Bob Fulton has to be one of the centres.. you know how you watch primary school football and there is that one kid who gets the ball runs around the opposing team straightens up and scores - Bob was still doing that kind of stuff in 73 grand final... say no more. After those blokes it starts to get a bit more tricky and more open to debate but as far as I am concerned the above are non negotiable maybe Andrew Johns at half back but I have not given it enough thought although I do note NSW have not won a series since he left the scene so I am inclined to run with him at half back also i think like all the above he makes it in any era.

Jaybob, the game is so different to what was played in that period. But none the less the modern side is fantastic. JT is a great player no doubt.. Andrew Johns is the greatest footballer I have seen. JT as great as he is, is not as complete a footballer as Johns was., We need to remember the game is about attack and defence, JT is by no stretch of the imagination a great defender, but Johns was, Johns had a much better kicking game, better passing game and ran at the line like a mini Les Boyd(no he did not have JT's show and go). For mine Johns is a complete a footballer as would ever see. I rate Cameron Smith as one of the greatest players I have seen . he probably could have made a really good oid fashioned hooker, he is a just a great footballer. Ditto with Slater and GI, no arguments from me there.

I think the current side is better. Inglis or Slater are probably the best fullbacks we have ever seen, I'd say Slater over the years, and Inglis would take centre. Smith is the best Hooker, and Thurston is arguably the best Half, based on stats he is but the King and Joey might have something to say. 3 very important positions, and when you compare their competition, the candidates were not in the same side at the same time. You might say that the international competition is weaker now days but I just think this team is too strong, NZ have a team in the NRL now, they have much more interest and massive amount of players to pick from. I hate using this as an example but the dominance of the QLD team over the Blues is a testament to how good these players are.

My view is the 86 side was brilliant and I think the 86 GB side was stronger than the 82 GB side as well. The reality is that Australian sides right through that period were all sensational football sides as indeed is the modern side. But I just feel and maybe it's how you want to remember things as well. that Mid 60's to mid 70's there was so many gun footballers in Australian Rugby league, we also had a lot of great rugby players in our game through that period as well.

That's a frightening team, Rod but I would question your view of GB in the 80s. Just for example, the GB team that was hammered in the first Test of 1986 at Old Trafford included players such as Joe Lydon, Garry Schofield, Ellery Hanley, Kevin Ward, Lee Crooks and the immensely gifted - but perennially injured - Tony Myler. Am I wrong in saying that the first 5 from that list all played for Australian clubs and didn't merely survive, but flourish? The '86 Kangaroos were just too good.

I think now we are going through a golden era like we had back in the 60's. I know the 80's sides were brilliant, but gee GB were not great during the 80's. Whilst in the 60's there were still very strong. Not considering todays stars . If it did a composite side from the mid to late 60's to tye mid eighties. This would be my side. 1. Langlands 2.Irvine 3. Gasnier 4.Meninga 5.Grothe 6.Lewis 7.Sterling 8.Raper 9.Mcarthy 10.Coote 11.Beetson 12. Walters 13. O'Niell You could select a second and third team that probably pretty darn close to each other. In my view that was a great period in Australian rugby league and could have been for Australian Rugby as well, when you think of the talent that went across to league during that period.

Tigraines - I beg to differ.... as big as is the gap is between SuperLeague and NRL it is nothing like the chasm that existed between the Sydney comp and the English League in the early eighties. By the seventies the game in Sydney was starting to incorporate semi serious physical conditioning of players weight training etc as well as proper coaching.The game in England was still a workingmans weekend hobby played for beer money while down here things were getting serious thanks to poker machines. The 82 tourists were just so much fitter and stronger.than the poms it was a no contest - they were also much better coached and way more skilled.The skill gap still exists but their players these days are probably just as fit and strong as ours .