www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 36,00.html The above story got me thinking. I know normal sized lads who play rugby and I know lads who have gotten bigger with some 'help' so to speak. Anyway it brought me to have a look at teams from years gone by along with modern day teams and the players in them. It is quite clear that there has been a great difference in both size and muscle definition in players over the last maybe 20 years or so. A few pictures to emphasise the point below. After the banning of Newton and his claims should we have more drug tests throughout the game? There appears to me to have been a significant change in the stature and size of a player and I'm not sure if you can put this down to improved training and nutrition. Any thoughts?

www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 36,00.html The above story got me thinking. I know normal sized lads who play rugby and I know lads who have gotten bigger with some 'help' so to speak. Anyway it brought me to have a look at teams from years gone by along with modern day teams and the players in them. It is quite clear that there has been a great difference in both size and muscle definition in players over the last maybe 20 years or so. A few pictures to emphasise the point below. After the banning of Newton and his claims should we have more drug tests throughout the game? There appears to me to have been a significant change in the stature and size of a player and I'm not sure if you can put this down to improved training and nutrition. Any thoughts?

Cunningham, Long and Wellens are perfect examples. Have a look at them from 1999.

perfect examples of what?

Of what a difference Full time training, conditioners, the right diet and the right rehab has done for rugby league.

..I presume!

Perfect examples of players that have had dozens of blood tests over the years and never done anything wrong.

My thoughts are, you're wrong.

What's your point.

i hope so mate.

Is that Slander or Lible?

In Cunningham's case it is a matter of fact and record so would be neither

Has the training and amount of training changed that much over recent years though to justify such a monumental difference in size and definition?

Also how much do players get tested? It would be interesting to find out how often players get tested in both codes.

Are you nuts?

The reason why players' shapes have changed over the last 20 - 30 years is because of the use of weight training as part of the basics of the game. From the late 1980's/early 1990's onwards weight training and bulking up became a must for all players.

Andy Currier, the Widnes centre in the mid 1980's who played for GB and also had a stint in Australia (he was the top scorer in the Australian League), was twelve and a half stone in his peak, according to a programme I have. That just would not happen today. He would be expected to put on at leas three stone of muscle. I'm the same weight and height as him and I'm a decent long distant runner.

By contrast, I recall reading Robbie Paul's weight routine in the late 1990's. He spent a lot of his time bulking up. He had to get up at 6am to eat every day.

I would guess that the players in the photos from the 1970s and even 1980s spent zero time in the gym. Today, all professional players will have a significant weights routine that's part of their life. Hence the difference in body shape.