In honour of Mal Meninga’s anointment as an Immortal, I rewatched the classic Great Britain vs Australia Test at Old Trafford.
This match has been written about previously on The Roar, so I’ll give my hot takes on how the game was played compared to a modern game of rugby league.
1. Rugby league was a lot closer to rugby than it is today. Defences only had to retreat five metres, so it was much harder to make ten metres with a hit-up.
There was way more offloading in the game, with a lot more players looking to pass as they were tackled. So many flick passes. Both sides spread the ball wide on their own line. There wasn’t a lot of ‘percentage footy’.
2. Great Britain loved their kicking. Third tackle of the match – kick for touch. Crowd clapped.
3. Raking for the ball at marker was super dangerous. And not very effective! three or four times Benny Elias raked for the ball at marker and gave away a repeat set of six and always looked like he’d kick someone in the hands or head.
4. The goalkicking was terrible. A combined two from seven and the misses weren’t even close.
5. Great Britain missed two field goals. In the first half. With the score 0-0. The kicks were dreadful. The commentators didn’t mind the tactic! I counted seven shots at field goal in the match and the only one that got above hip height was by Ricky Stuart standing almost at the corner post.
[latest_videos_strip category=”league” name=”League”]
6. There was a lot more deception at dummy half, especially with which side the pass was going to.
7. There were way less hit-ups from the big men as we see today. There were still plenty, but there was a lot more spreading the ball wide early in the set.
8. The short chip kick or grubber was an option. Generally the halfback was about 5-10m behind the line, with the fullback deep.
9. Players didn’t have a set side or ‘channel’. Watch the first Australian try – Dale Shearer (left wing) is running about 15m in from the sideline and dummies to his left to Andrew Ettingshausen (right wing) who is supporting on the far sideline. It’s easier to cross into North Korea today than it is to switch sides on a rugby league field.
10. There was very little intent to kick to the in-goal to force a goal-line dropout, because…
11. The in-goals were miniscule. Obviously it was limited by the Old Trafford field but still, it just wasn’t an option.
12. The bench wasn’t a factor. Given the quality of players, I was surprised the Australians didn’t even warm-up. Even if only to get the opposition thinking.
13. The game went for 80 minutes. There was no time clock on screen, but there were only a couple of injury stoppages and they were pretty short.
14. The refereeing was dreadful. Inconsistent in every way. I never believed the incompetent French referee schtick until I saw this replay.
All up, this was an excellent game. It was tough, tight and evenly matched. It was definitely rugby league, but noticeably different to what you’ll see today.
For mine, the biggest difference was the 5m defensive line. I know not every match from the past was as well regarded as this one, but you could probably watch this entire match in the time the Bunker spends reviewing decisions during tonight’s game.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Technically it was a 10 metre ap with the attacking side supposed to be also back 5 metres. Good comment though. I agree with both the marker being allowed to strike for the ball (that was the original purpose of the play the ball) and raking the ball out in the tackle. It wasn't a problem for nearly 100 years.
Ad-0
Guest
Forget NFL and take a look at Union. They can strip all day and it hasn't hurt them offloading in and around contact.
Ad-0
Guest
.
Boz
Guest
I disagree. Less structured attack is much harder to defend against. Teams would also be encouraged to throw the ball around more because if they lost it or it was stripped, then they have more opportunity to regain possession compared to now where they either have to wait for the opposition to make an error during their set.
Nat
Roar Guru
I know it was a big risk for the Titans but I would have loved to see how Crontract Footy would've worked with the Walker Bros in the top job
Ad-0
Guest
I'll be damned, you're right. I could have sworn he was subbed with significant time left. Makes it all the more puzzling since he was about to get a breather.
Rellum
Roar Guru
Sure, there are differences in the games, but you have to admit they see the risk reward of an option of attack as to great to even try it. Based on the attitudes to risk of modern League coaches I can't see them going for a less structured attack if there is even more risk involved in a passing a ball after contact with no strip rules.
Ad-0
Guest
Yes, but theres 2 main reasons for that which don't apply to league. Firstly, it makes more sense to look for a block or run out of bounds than pass. Secondly, the penalty for turning over possession is so much higher in NFL. In league or union your likely to get another crack at the ball within a minute. In NFL, if the other team goes on a long drive you might not see the ball for 8 or 10 minutes. Besides, as was mentioned above, it used to be a fair play but you would never see it more than 1 or 2 times in a game.
Cugel
Roar Rookie
Heh, that's my rip, though I didn't put on Youtube. I had crappy equipment and crappy codecs back - hence the BlurryVision (TM)
Ad-0
Guest
Contested scrums and no interchange added so much variety to the game. You used to need 2 fat guys to prop and opposition teams would try and move them around the park to wear them out and exploit the holes at the end of the game. With 10m and interchange, the risk reward for passing plays early in the count has made them redundant and you are better off hitting it up 1 out until it's time to kick. Well drilled defensive units miss out too. With the 5 meter rule you could trap a team inside the 22 and be receiving the kick around the halfway line putting you straight on attack. This never happens since the 10m was introduced.
Rellum
Roar Guru
You know NFL players can pass the ball backwards when ever they want. You know how often they do it? Almost never. You know why? Because they see the risk of losing possession as to big a risk of passing the ball. If we make the stripping rule anything goes, so goodbye to any sort or offloads and even less passing.
Cugel
Roar Rookie
Just a note, Sironen was replaced after Chicka's match levelling try
Ad-0
Guest
Yep. There used to be a thing called ball security and Union and NFL players manage it fine. It also rids us of the ridiculous spectacle of players dropping the ball on purpose with the ref randomly trying to decide if it's a strip or a knock on.
Rellum
Roar Guru
There was way more offloading in the game, with a lot more players looking to pass as they were tackled. So many flick passes. Both sides spread the ball wide on their own line. There wasn’t a lot of ‘percentage footy’. Very true and the game is poorer for it. If there was one player from the 90's I would clone for today's game it would be Jason Smith. His skillset doesn't exist anymore. You could really play a different game with players like that. You could work on the playing playing a style that would like to get players one on one a lot, which would lead to more offloads in dangerous positions, and with well timed support play you would open the game up. That is why I love to watch Ipswich play.
Rellum
Roar Guru
The late 80's to late 90's is without doubt the best version of the game as a spectacle. The game in the last 12-15 has become so defense orientated that it has become boring. The players are sticking to their sides mostly for defensive reasons. I keep saying that the 2015 Broncs were the only team to shake up the style of play in the last decade in a more offensive way. In the last couple of years it has become a game of fatigue management. This is why I was so upbeat about the start of the year because I thought the NRL was serious about trying to stop the negative footy, but alas. I agree with you on the mix of semi-pro and professionalism as well. I remember and American I was working with in the 90's saying that she loved Australian sport because it wasn't so professional. At the time I was a little offended think our sport was professional. But now looking back I can see what she meant. All risk and just playing the game has been drained from the game in the fully professional time. It is why I think we really need to reshape the game with a lot of interchange and time wasting rules to really speed it back up again. The Broncs game against Cronulla the other week just about every set had a good one to two minute rest after it. Suddenly there was a period in the second have where there was 6 or seven straights sets without a stop and all the players were out on their feet and the ball was kicked into touch without much gain just so there could be a rest. Just 6 sets straight and the modern player is done. I am sure it is why we are seeing so many two pointers taken as well to slow the game down.
The Barry
Roar Guru
It’s great watching those old games and amazing what you can find on YouTube. That late 80s to mid 90s era of rugby league was so good - my favourite era. It was the perfect mix of pro/semi-pro. Footy was footy it wasn’t about completion rates and low errors.
Boz
Guest
Completely agree. People argue against bringing back striking in the play-the-ball and stripping the ball with no matter how many players in the tackle because they say it will happen all the time. Well, watch any games in the 80's or 90's when it was allowed, and the evidence would suggest otherwise. Go back to 5 metres - with both attack and defence having to be 5m from the play-the ball, no interchange - only substitutions, and bring back the rules that added variety and spice to the game - instead of the bland dross we are served up now.
Danno1
Guest
I had just moved to England back in 1990 and watched the game at Wembley. The blokes I was playing fotty with at the time were all English and Welsh, except for 3 other Aussies. It was a great day, except for the result. When Old Trafford was on we all repaired to the local pub, which was bemused by these Aussies, Yorkshiremen and Welshmen cheering and yelling like crazy....still remember being pulled up by a bobby for being too loud as we walked home, the Aussie contingent was repeating at maximum volume the commentators call of the last try. A great day and night that was!
Nat
Roar Guru
I too have taken a trip down memory lane this week with some of the clips posted including that Test at Old Trafford. It was a great representation of what league was in the day. Lyons and Stuart, talk about a control and creative halves pairing. Looking at the Aust team and you rightly think Wow, but then you look at GB - captained by Hanley with Schofield, Betts, Chariots Offiah and (we'll see your Benny Elais and raise you) Andy Gregory. That was a team good enough to beat Aust in the first game and take it the wire in G2. That says plenty in my book.
Zavjalova
Roar Rookie
Nice artice Lee. I wouldn't say the game was tougher in the 90's than it is now, but in my opinion it was a lot harder and grittier than it is now.