1982 Premiers vs 2012 Also Rans

[Page8383]

I sometimes wonder if a modern day cellar dweller would beat a premiership team from a different era.

Would, say Melbourne, beat the 1982 Carlton Premiership team (for example) if both were in their respective playing / training / fitness conditions and levels?

Considering the big gap in the speed and skill in the game between now and then would the modern day dees run 1982 Carlton off their feet? Or would Carlton's raw talent be enough?

There are alot of variables like tactics and playing styles and umpiring standards / interpretations.

Just some off season wondering

 

[Bardo State]

I also think of this sometimes. You would have to think that most modern teams would beat teams of 30 years ago but it would also depend on how the game is officiated. By today's rules or the rules of 30 years ago?

 

[Tas]

I think it would be like a recently retired player in the Legends game.

 

[*PAF]

Using rules from 1982 or 2012?

 

[mHmmm]

I doubt the Melbourne team from this year would be capable of beating themselves.

 

[Elite Master]

I would say that both teams would have certain advantages over the other, but the modern day team with the overall professionalism advantage would have more polish with their easily superior endurance that might determine the outcome. There is a lot of variables involved of course, so I look forward to reading some other more detailed replies in this thread.

I think the comparisons of elite teams from the mid to late 90s vs the mediocre teams of today would favor the former a lot more despite the time gap. I say this because the mid to late 90s was when football started to really get more professional that paves the way to the standards of today..

 

[Tiger2709]

If the rules were from '82 most modern day players would be taking a lot of short steps and the top players would be hammered form start to finish, but their fitness level and over all skill would probably see the survivors win the game.

Then again it's hard too see the Demons of 2012 winning in a game as hard as that would be and the young bodies of the new franchises would be overwhelmed but most of the top 8 of this year would get over the line.

 

[donbooger]

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.

 

[malteaser]

the game is also in the head and Melbourne and any other team on the bottom of the ladder wouldn't win.

 

[*PAF]

If the rules were from '82 most modern day players would be taking a lot of short steps and the top players would be hammered form start to finish, but their fitness level and over all skill would probably see the survivors win the game.

Then again it's hard too see the Demons of 2012 winning in a game as hard as that would be and the young bodies of the new franchises would be overwhelmed but most of the top 8 of this year would get over the line.

1978 ( 2 subs and no interchange)
Best players: R DiPierdomenico, L Matthews, R Eade, D Scott, T Wallace, P Knights (lots of hard and dirty skilled players there)

Using the rules from back then (1978) some of the better players in today's teams wouldn't last the game. Forget the 500 miles per game bit it just wouldn't happen and the extra weight would just slow you down as the game progresses.

 

[scottwade]

Would, say Melbourne, beat the 1982 Carlton Premiership team (for example) if both were in their respective playing / training / fitness conditions and levels?

Considering the big gap in the speed and skill in the game between now and then would the modern day dees run 1982 Carlton off their feet? Or would Carlton's raw talent be enough?

Class would prevail.
The goal to goal line (as named) in the 1982 Carlton team; Doull, Hunter, Buckley, Maclure, Ditchburn.
Plus others such as Wayne Johnston, Ashman and Fitzpatrick.
That Carlton team actually had a lot bit of speed and run as well (the Mosquito fleet) which would have been suited to the modern game.

No contest IMO.

 

[FootyGeek]

The fitness issue always bemuses me. The players of the 70s and 80s were absolutely flogged on the training track.

There may not have been any sports science but these were very fit endurance athletes.

Sure there were not the running mauls of players across the ground back and forward like today but at the same time most players were on for the entire game and often in much more trying conditions than today.

A player like Rod Ashman would be a superstar in todays game. He was an elite kick. Best I have ever seen at the club.

The Carlton 82 team with Fitzpatrick Doull Ashman Sheldon Glascott Buckley Harmes Bosustow Maclure Johnston McConville Marcou Maylin Hunter would absolutely smash Melbourne 2012 and many other current sides. Against the top sides I suspect they would struggle but give a good contest.

 

[sandeano]

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.

 

[The Filth Wizard]

I'd back North '96 versus any Swans grand final side but I think Hawks '12 would have us.

It's odd when you break it all down.

 

[Ross Prunster]

I'd back North '96 versus any Swans grand final side but I think Hawks '12 would have us.

It's odd when you break it all down.

Schoenmakers not playing?

 

[scarecrow2k1]

Melbourne would tank anyway.

 

[Jezzitizle]

Melbourne would tank anyway.

I laughed.

 

[Doss]

I'd back North '96 versus any Swans grand final side but I think Hawks '12 would have us.

It's odd when you break it all down.

Carey would rip Hawks '12 defence to pieces. Although I guess equally, North probably wouldn't have had anyone who could go with Franklin, Mick Martyn and Archer wouldn't have been mobile or tall enough. McKernan/Capuano would have dominated the rucks, and Hawks probably had the better midfield.

I actually think North '96 versus Sydney '12 could be quite close, as I see a lot of parallels between them in terms of their physical toughness.

 

[Page8383]

I think a better old team, like Carlton from 82 would win more of the contested ball but the modern, less accomplished team would perhaps hold onto the ball more successfully when they did get it
The one on ones in the forward and back line are a big variable and would come down to individual personnel and coach's strategy for diffusing a key forward (eg zoning off or double teaming a power forward)

 

[Wallaby]

They did a detailed study of this situation in soccer once.....

 

[Skeppersap]

I'd back North '96 versus any Swans grand final side but I think Hawks '12 would have us.

It's odd when you break it all down.

Carey would have kicked 20 against Schoenmakers!

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Carey would rip Hawks '12 defence to pieces. Although I guess equally, North probably wouldn't have had anyone who could go with Franklin, Mick Martyn and Archer wouldn't have been mobile or tall enough. McKernan/Capuano would have dominated the rucks, and Hawks probably had the better midfield.

I actually think North '96 versus Sydney '12 could be quite close, as I see a lot of parallels between them in terms of their physical toughness.

True. But you couldn't rule out Roughead being an issue either.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

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

 

[Lethal]

The players from 1982 would be about 50-60 years old. Melbourne would lose.

 

[mediumsizered]

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

Once again, it depends which rules are being used. The modern interpretations or those in the '80s. If using the '80s interpretations, Fitzpatrick would not have hesitated to run straight through his taller opponents at the centre bounce to send a very clear message that he intended not to concede the centre bounce. After that he would stand beside them & capitalise on his superior body use, something the modern rucks would know little about.

I would also be fairly confident that the likes of Buckley, Ashman, Harmes, Johnston would go alright in the clearance battles. Their opponents would be constantly looking over their shoulders if they got to the contest first.