I was agreeing lol

calm down dear.

humour me a minute, but at any point in your life when you were growing up, did your dad/anyone else feed you a 'they're not as good as they used to be' line, to describe anything from food to beer to music to sports players to politicians to cars to films etc etc? this seems to be exactly what you're doing.

There, you humoured me, now I'll humour you. The Wigan team of ten years ago was far from a great team. In fact, the Wigan team of 15 years ago was also far from a great team (yes they won a SL) but I'd be thinking more than twice before naming the likes of florimo, moore, reber, cassidy (as a hooker), goldspink, tony smith, holgate, mark smith, jon clarke ahead of any of our starting team now. we've had great individuals such as faz, rads, connolly, paul, newton, renouf, robinson, dallas etc but as a team I think this one is more rounded. thats just my opinion.

Now if you'd like to go back 20 years (not sure if saints fans go back that far???? ya know, before sl...) then yeah we are entering the territory of that wigan team and that national team (mostly wigans team) were the business. However, the 20 years since (when according to your theory it was never as good) never stopped you lot from crowing about how super the wooper dooper saints team were, and bragging about back to back this that and the other? And when we turned sides out at your place to get a good stuffing we didnt turn round and say, well actually, all of rl is crap...we went home, had a beer, kicked the dog and got on with it.

The problem with your theory is that there's always someone older who will take you even further back to a time when, shock horror, we beat the aussies. They will scoff at names like hanley, edwards, gregory x2 etc and say its a sign of the times when we have to have an organiser (edwards) as a gb half back when we used to have the real deal (murphy) or we are stuck with a quick man who cant tackle on the wing (offiah) when we had the blockbuster himself (boston)

the point is using individual player comparisons to back up your theory doesnt work. matty smith isnt as good as trent barrett (i wish) but this wigan team would stick some serious points on that millward side.


Great post!!!!!

thinking about northampton saints post again, if we accept his/her post that rugby league has been steadily getting worse in the last 20 years would it be fair to say that saints have only ever really been a great side when rl was rubbish?

Yes! This! Haha

That must be another one of his/her 'incontrovertible facts'.

I thought there was no Rugby League before 1996 ?

I know from my foray a few weeks ago on the Saints board that you lot have very little respect for George. You're actually much nearer the truth with that comment (minus the sarcasm) than with the rubbish spouted by Saints fans about one of the great SL era centres.

The facts: despite missing a few games this season Carmont has still scored more tries than any Saints players and sits at no. 7 in the try scoring table. He's averaging a try a game. Not bad for a guy that's probably going to retire at the end of the season and who, according to you deluded scousers, was never very good anyway.





He's now running into top class form (watch the highlights of the Wakey game and weep!) just as we approach the business end of the season. It looks like the Indian summer of Carmont's career has a fair bit of life left in it still. Great news for us. Terrible news for the rest of SL.

2006 was not a vintage year..... The 2006 Saints side was a great side and to be fair to them any team can only beat what's in front of them, it wasn't their fault, but the standard of SL was truly awful that season and it's difficult to judge just how great a team that was given the lack of competition.

I don't think everything in the garden is rosy, but it's madness to say the quality of SL now is lower than the mid-noughties.

The disrespect shown to George Carmont by fans of both Saints and Warrington over the past few years has been pretty poor tbh. I read all these comments about us bigging him up as though he's some sort of superstar and you know what......he has been and still is for 'us'. He had a half decent career in Australia but he was a late comer to the game and we've really seen him blossom here. He's given Wigan his best years and when he does retire, whether that be at the end of this season or not, he can hold his head high and leave in the knowledge that in the future when Wigan fan's talk about great centre's of the past his name will be mentioned alongside guys like Renouf, Connolly, Miles etc etc

He may not have come with the reputation those guys did but it's performances on the pitch that matter and in terms of that he's been as fantastic. He was always spoke about as being a cracking player because he offered great value for money which he has but even if we'd been paying him fortunes he'd have been worth it.

Terrific player.......[size=50please do another year George[/size.

Ask Ryan atkins whos the best centre in the league ...George Carmont

Carmont is an above average centre in a league of mediocrity - compared to what's out there at the moment he is indeed class and one of the best 3 or 4 centres playing in the league. He's certainly a cut above what he have available at #3 and #4 at the moment. Compared to top championship winning centres of the past he's simply above average however. He'd never have worn a Wigan, Bradford or Saints shirt 10/15 years ago most certainly.

And it says everything about the state of the competition yet again that a clapped out old NRL never-was [iis[/i one of the best centres in the league...

...and as for trying to compare him to Newlove as some numpty did on the Saints board...

He's so much classier than Scott Naylor and he'd be in our team above most of the centres who played in our 2002 season.

If super league is that poor in your opinion then go and watch your sport at Franklin gardens.

Heard this morning that Smith accepted £60k a year less than what Widnes offered him (£140K was Widnes' offer)

to be fair to you im sure you dont fully understand the difference between good rugby players and bad ones, as you were still saying after the 3rd thrashing of the season saints were better player for player than wigan. george carmont is far from average, one of the best overal i have seen in superleague and hes still the best in the league now.

Why ask Ryan Atkins who is the best centre in the league is

Ryan is the best centre in super league ask Carmont the same question

Both players are exceptional but on current form this season and last season its
Atkins

The same Ryan Atkins who was woeful defensively for England? Atkins is big and fast and in a league where 80% of defences are garbage that's all that's needed and indeed it's more than enough to look brilliant. Take into account the attributes and understanding that centres need when facing tougher defences and Carmont wins hands down.

ask a wire fan whos the best there going to say atkins ask a wigan fan they will say carmont, but i think carmont is a better overall but atkins is better attacking

Yes we are - not in the centres though sadly.



Yes, well - I clearly "fully understand the difference between good rugby players and bad ones" a darned sight better than the likes of you matey...

****buzzz**** Wrong answer.... 2+2<>5... I've been to Franklins Gardens once ever. Try again.

Anyway, RL is still a much better spectacle than RU but the gap is getting rapidly narrower, but that's another issue...

Very fair - I'd certainly have either of them in a Saints shirt at the moment very gladly. Neither of them still would have made a Wigan, Saints or Bradford starting 17 10-15 years ago though...

He's so much classier than Scott Naylor and he'd be in our team above most of the centres who played in our 2002 season.