1982 Premiers vs 2012 Also Rans

[Blue Dawn]

This side won 3 flags in 4 years FFS! To suggest that modern day spuds would 'out contest' blokes like The Dominator, Jimmy Buckley, Wayne Harmes etc because of a size difference is idiotic - Rene Kink played in 2 of those beaten midfields and i recall Johnno ironing out Dipper in a GF.

Some stupid responses in this thread from posters obviously not old enough to have actually seen these champion in action.

 

[RUNVS]

Modern day tactics alone would give Melbourne a big advantage. Would the 1982 Carlton team have any idea what to do when Melbourne start zoning them?

 

[Rob]

Melbourne floods the backline, Carlton can't score. Melbourne get the ball into there forward line, forward defensive zone until goal is scored.

I'm afraid it will be a massacre in Melbourne's favour.

This. Players are now capable of running up and down the field, the modern day team would totally outnumber the 80's team all over the park. You'd have Carlton's forwards staying inside 50 whilst their opponents get leather poisoning gathering uncontested ball in the midfield. Carlton players would be constantly kicking long to a contest, only to see a 5 on 2 in Melbourne's favour with the ball coming back along with streams of Melbourne players. With their opponents 30 metres behind. If they do get it forward then they're going to be met with 15 defenders on their 6 forwards. No matter how much you want to play dirty you're just not going to score enough.

 

[big_e]

Reminds me of this Bradman anecdote:

"The Don was once asked how much he would have averaged against the West Indies pace attack of the late 80s.
He said I think I'd have averaged around 60 or 70.
The interviewer said, but you averaged almost 100 in your career.
The Don said, yes but I'm in my 70s now."

 

[FRUMPY]

the fitness and skills of the todays players would absolutly thrash a side from the early 80's, even from the early 90's. Todays plays are way more skilful and so far ahead in fitness/strength/running ability, it is beyond a joke

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

There's nothing sadder than the delusional nostalgia of people who think that guys who smoked and had jobs during the week would compete with today's million dollar athletes that are finely honed to get the best out of their bodies.

People are also deluding themselves as to how hard the game was back then. There were a lot of big hits in games back then, but they were still illegal, and players still got suspended for them. If today's game was so much softer, how would Dermie have been suspended for 39 games throughout his career? Did he murder people on the field?

Complete infantile idiocy to suggest semi-professional athletes would compete with modern, fully professional ones. It would be like watching a team from first division in England play against a Premier league team, but without the low-scoring nature of soccer that allows occasional upsets.

 

[gbatman]

no, premiership teams from yester year would beat the lesser teams of now.

 

[FootyGeek]

There's nothing sadder than the delusional nostalgia of people who think that guys who smoked and had jobs during the week would compete with today's million dollar athletes that are finely honed to get the best out of their bodies.

People are also deluding themselves as to how hard the game was back then. There were a lot of big hits in games back then, but they were still illegal, and players still got suspended for them. If today's game was so much softer, how would Dermie have been suspended for 39 games throughout his career? Did he murder people on the field?

Complete infantile idiocy to suggest semi-professional athletes would compete with modern, fully professional ones. It would be like watching a team from first division in England play against a Premier league team, but without the low-scoring nature of soccer that allows occasional upsets.

My belief in an unprovable hypothetical is better than yours.

Wars have been waged over less.

 

[Blues_Man]

They average height and weight of the 1982 Carlton GF side was 183.6cm and 84kgs. Most sides are generally between 186-188cms* and between 86-89kgs so they'd be giving away a lot of size all over the park. They only had three guys over 190cm with the 200cm Jones on the bench. Their ruckman Fitzpatrick being only 191cms wouldn't get a hitout against Sandilands (211), Nic Nat (201), Warnock (206), Zac Smith (205), Jacobs (203) and Cox (203). I think Mumford is the shortest number one ruck in the league at 199cms so they'd get belted in the ruck.

Their centreline and followers were an average of 177cms and 76kgs:

Harmes: 177cm, 85kg
Buckley: 175cm, 72kg
Glascott: 183cm, 71kg
Maylin: 175cm, 76kg
Ashman: 175cm, 76kg

Compare that to some bottom 8 sides:

Cotchin: 185cm, 84kg
Deledio: 188cm, 88kg
Martin: 187cm, 86kg
Tuck: 189cm, 92kg
Jackon: 188cm, 91kg
Grigg: 190cm, 85kg
Foley: 178cm, 80kg
Helbig: 185cm, 83kg
Edwrads: 180cm, 82kg

Boyd: 184cm, 89kg
Cross: 186cm, 87kg
Griffen: 188cm, 86kg
Cooney: 186cm, 87kg
Higgins: 184cm, 90kg
Liberatore: 180cm, 80kg
Wallis: 184cm, 83kgs
Picken: 183cm, 83kg


So they'd struggle to get a hitout and then would have to compete with much bigger bodies to win clearances. It would be like fielding a midfield with players built like Brent Harvey and Shane Edwards.

*http://www.fanfooty.com.au/forum/index.php?topic=53524.0

Since when did Sandilands and others play with melbourne ??

 

[donbooger]

Lot of nostalgia getting in the way of logic. Comparing players is pointless the old champion teams would get beaten by modern tactics and to a lesser degree endurance and strength (the old KP forwards and backs excepted for strength).

To be clear though I think no one would disagree that if you took 1982 Carlton spent 6 months training new tactics and a year or so training them to todays standards they would annihilate Melbourne and compete proudly with the best sides of today.

 

[Tigersman]

I love the theory that because players of three decades or so ago could get away with more that they would intimidate todays players even though on average they would be giving away significant height and weight. Todays players would retaliate in kind if allowed surely. If anything i reckon the modern day player would intimidate with the attack on the footy at such speed. I love watching the old games and stars of the past but the gap in skill and speed of the game today to that of the eighties is enormous. Today's sides would murder any side from the eighties and earlier. Watch the old games. It's obvious.

 

[mediumsizered]

I find it amusing the assumption being made by some that the current players are far better skilled than their counterparts of the '80s. Just using the examples of the Carlton players referred to, Rod Ashman's skills on both sides of his body would match those of the best of today's players & Wayne Johnston's left foot was as penetrating & accurate as Luke Hodge. Wayne Harmes had no trouble delivering a 50 metre pass to a teammate & Jim Buckley & Ken Sheldon were both highly skilled disposers.

You could go through some of the other teams from that same era & name plenty of players whose skills would be right up there with the best in the game today. One thing the players from that era have over their current counterparts was the ability to consistently take contested marks. If a player takes 4-5 contested marks in a game nowadays the media will wax lyrical about what a sensational game said player has had. Yet for many of the players back in the '80s a 4-5 contested mark game would indicate an off day.

The definite thing today's players have over their counterparts of the '80s is that they are professional players & therefore have a significantly superior fitness base, but give the players from the '80s a similar opportunity & they would match it with their current counterparts.

 

[Chewy]

People are way too critical of the bottom sides. They don't realise the competition is always a lot closer than it appears. The difference between top and bottom teams is much narrower than the giant improvements made over a 10 year span, let alone a 20 or 30 year span. (i.e. tactics and training)

However.. like someone said earlier in the thread, it all depends on what rules we're playing by. If GWS were to travel back in time, the 1982 meatheads in black boots would be far too rough and tough for the 2012 metrosexuals in their white boots. Elbows, knees, fists, shirtfronts, squirrel grips... You name it. It would be like the 1958 Grand Final when the Collingwood thugs roughed up the fancy-pants Demons, who spent the next 3 quarters trying to get even and taking their eye off the ball.

Football is more professional these days - the kids are more ready - better athletes who prepare better than ever before and run harder than ever, but people forget they were probably better natural footballers back in the old days (reading the play, judging the flight of the ball, nudging their opponents out, grabbing the bouncing ball cleanly with one grab, etc...

It's a fallacy that today's footballer are more talented than in the past. They re bigger, more athetic and better prepared, that's all. I would say the inherent skill level (natural ability a la Trent Cotchin) is probably less.

 

[Falchoon]

Melbourne beat a GWS team made up of 17 players with less than 20 games experience and 3 geriatrics by the grand total of 4 goals.



1982 Carlton would go ok.

 

[tazhawk]

no, premiership teams from yester year would beat the lesser teams of now.

Rubbish

The 88,89 Hawthorn side would rip GWS to shreds.

Dunstall, Dermie, Buckenara would have a field day down forward.

 

[gbatman]

Rubbish

The 88,89 Hawthorn side would rip GWS to shreds.

Dunstall, Dermie, Buckenara would have a field day down forward.

Yeah, that's what I said...

 

[Shagga is all Class]

Melbourne.

Carlton would spend all day kicking to a contest that is defended or down the line straight back to a Melbourne player.

Melbourne with size and strength would do enough in the contested situations and tackling along with the inferred pressure of a zone. 80s handballing would not survive.

Melbourne with the skills these days and height would easily be able to control the football from backline and go coast to coast using the open wing or slow chip kicks for a forward 50 entry. If melbourne do not get a shot they set up to bottle or for repeat entries.

There are teams these days that understand the tactics that were destroyed by a Collingwood doing the same thing. Even Melbourne were more than competitive against a Collingwood.

Carlton 1982 would be beaten in the box.

 

[juss]

There's nothing sadder than the delusional nostalgia of people who think that guys who smoked and had jobs during the week would compete with today's million dollar athletes that are finely honed to get the best out of their bodies.

People are also deluding themselves as to how hard the game was back then. There were a lot of big hits in games back then, but they were still illegal, and players still got suspended for them. If today's game was so much softer, how would Dermie have been suspended for 39 games throughout his career? Did he murder people on the field?

Complete infantile idiocy to suggest semi-professional athletes would compete with modern, fully professional ones. It would be like watching a team from first division in England play against a Premier league team, but without the low-scoring nature of soccer that allows occasional upsets.

Laughable how people don't see how much the modern day game has changed. The players are faster, fitter, stronger, better prepared both tactically and physically, their nutrition is better, their training regimes are more relevant, they study their opposition and are regimented to play to a strict gameplan. This compared to guys who don't always train, some smoke like chimneys and most of them are on the piss the night after a game.

People assume that the "old guys" would run through the new guys if played under old rules. So why would the new midfielders, who are in most cases 5-10cm bigger and 5-10kg bigger not just run through their physically smaller opponents?

Every time old team gets the ball they kick 50m long to a one on one contest. Only thing is, new team doesn't make it a one on one, it's a three on one. The flood and forward press alone would be tactically enough to stifle just about every pre 90s team.

It doesn't make the old teams any less of a team, it's just the way that sport evolves. In the same way a race car now is going to be faster than a race car 20 years ago, or sprinters now will have better times than previous years. Sports and athletes evolve, and 30 years from now I reckon the 2042 team would beat the 2012 Swans.

**The only obvious exception is the GWS/GC who's kids may not be physically developed enough to compete over 4 quarters. Again I'm not sure what would happen there but it still could be a case of men against boys. Any other team however would get the job done relatively comfortably.

 

[calyam]

A lot of it depends on whether the older team is allowed to be taught tactics or is aware of the tactics that teams in 2012 utilise. If not then it would be difficult for them to compete, particularly if they utilised substitutions like they would have in 1982 (for example, doing only a handful of moves per game). While players are bigger and stronger, I think the fitness issue is overplayed a little and is related a lot more to the substitution rule than any large increase in fitness.

It is obvious that the 1982 team would be more talented than the 2012 cellar dweller. Although the overall talent pool is now deeper than ever before (national league versus state league, international players, better development programs), the individual talent in a premiership team in 1982 would greatly exceed a Melbourne team in 2012. If the two teams played without any preparation or knowledge of the opposition then I'd expect the 2012 team to win (with the exception of GWS and GC which would likely still lose) but with a month or two of preparation I'd be backing the more talented 1982 team to get the job done.

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

Richmond 1974 (Bartlett, Clay, Hart, Sheedy, etc.) would absolutely demolish the Tigers of 2004 (Polo, Pattison, Hughes, etc.)

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

Since when did Sandilands and others play with melbourne ??

Title said "also rans". I was talking about non-contenders, not just Melbourne.

 

[Skeppersap]

Yeah, that's what I said...

Tazhawk does not understand concepts that most of us learn at primary school, such as punctuation.

 

[LightTower4]

If Helen D'Amico made her appearance I have the feeling many of those Melbourne boys would be quivering wrecks for the rest of the game.

Thanks for explaining why Richmond lost that game when in front when she did her run.
Although in Richmonds case it's made you quivering wrecks every year since, except on two occasions.

 

[Roobs321]

Melbourne's modern day tactics could mean they will likely suprise Carlton and upset them. But, say, if this was over a period of time, '82 Carlton would eventually figure out a way and their cream (which is entirely absent from Melbourne) would rise to the top. '82 Carlton would eventually sort them out, whether it takes a quarter or a few clashes.
Melbourne would definitly have the higher ground, having been exposed to the modern game. Carlton would need a little time to figure out how to overcome that era gap.

There is the fitness aspect. Melbourne would be a lot fitter you would imagine than a pre AFL-side. However, I think some other cellar dwellers in recent times would be more capable of taking out '82 Carlton. West Coast 2010 would probably win. Brisbane 1998 maybe too.

 

[Roobs321]

A lot of it depends on whether the older team is allowed to be taught tactics or is aware of the tactics that teams in 2012 utilise. If not then it would be difficult for them to compete, particularly if they utilised substitutions like they would have in 1982 (for example, doing only a handful of moves per game). While players are bigger and stronger, I think the fitness issue is overplayed a little and is related a lot more to the substitution rule than any large increase in fitness.

It is obvious that the 1982 team would be more talented than the 2012 cellar dweller. Although the overall talent pool is now deeper than ever before (national league versus state league, international players, better development programs), the individual talent in a premiership team in 1982 would greatly exceed a Melbourne team in 2012. If the two teams played without any preparation or knowledge of the opposition then I'd expect the 2012 team to win (with the exception of GWS and GC which would likely still lose) but with a month or two of preparation I'd be backing the more talented 1982 team to get the job done.

Agreed