Having watched a lot of the older games, its very clearly a few levels below in terms of skills. The only thing I really think which has gone downhill is goal kicking.
Any of the modern midfielders would absolutely pulverise any of the guns from the 80s/ 90s IMO.
Whille a lot of the KPPs may be stronger, they are nowhere near as mobile and they were much more limited in terms of skillset.
IMO only around 2005/6/7 does the standard really truly increase to a standard which is comparable to what it is today.
I think todays players have the better skills…we would see some amazing things if the pressure wasn’t so unrelenting…but would lose out to the players of the past…due to a lack of heart, and the want to win…current day players would eventually go into their shells & give up because it would become too hard…I think past players would have their measure in that regard…& I think that is enough to get you over the line…
Plenty of older players would have benefited from access to modern medicine. We all know the obvious ones and I’m sure there are more.
Watching the 1965 GF made me wonder if the ball was different too. There was some great marking and evasive skills but I thought poor kicking, maybe that was players in the habit of doing drop kicks rather than punts.
Also in the 90s games some of the best plays involved handballing forward of the play. Lots of little tap ons too.
Don’t forget, a lot of really good players retired at an early age to concentrate on their careers as they earned so little from footy. Some went and played country footy where they earned better money. It’s amazing to think of today.
For me, the peak football period was late 90’s / early 2000’s. Not just because we were a great team at the time, but to me there was a perfect mixture of hardness and skill, and the game wasn’t over umpired to within an inch of its life.
It more than stands up against modern football when you watch it today.
End result lighter ball, harder & faster ground. Easier to run faster for longer, and kick further.
Possible side effect of more head injuries from head hitting hard ground rather than mud.
One aspect of football that can be compared is the ability to cleanly pick up the ball.
This isn’t height dependant, nor particularly fitness related.
Yes, there are manicured level surfaces for modern players. And you have to allow for different decision making in the Bartlett era, where tapping the ball on was about trying to earn a free kick, rather than fumbling.
However one thing that’s struck me is how good many, not just great, players from the 70’s, 80’s & 90’s were at one touch pick ups.
Something that contemporary players are often lauded for, as a relatively rare skill.
So I don’t think there’s actually that much difference in actual player ability- it’s a question of tactics, aesthetics and conditions.
And everyone will have their own preferences there.
If we agree that players now are better than they ever were because of the amount of money, staff and coaches and time put into players skills etc. Within the AFL system there must be several thousand employed and then the people who make their living because of footy but are not part of the AFL staff or on contract. Its a huge industry. Along comes the corona virus.
The AFL want to cut it all back to bare bones to save the competition and save their own backsides.
No footy no AFL Executive’s and no Commission. So we can expect the standard of play to change considerably or will the rules change to compensate for the changes? Super goals and other changes higher scores makes the game look better or more exciting but will it? That is the question. Or is it a case of the fans will be so pleased to get footy back they won’t care. Maybe having the time off works both ways, the fans have had time to think about what it is they love about footy and what footy is all about and what it is about the game of Aussie Rules we really love without the bells and whistles.
Less staff, less money equals less time spent with players on skills etc. It will be interesting to see how this changes the make-up of teams. When you think of it if clubs have been secretly wanting to offload someone but couldn’t for some reason now is their chance or are the rules are the rules are the rules. If the whole game plan changes do contracts stay the same? Or is everything up for further discussion?
Actually I would still argue Diesel Williams as the best proponent? of the handball despite him despite having played his last game over 20 years ago. And theres been others. Misiti was v good for us.
But otherwise the modern midfielder as a complete footballer? I think Martin, Dangerfield, Pendlebury, Ablett Jnr etc leave most in the shade.
I don’t think it’s rule changes, as much as Coaches developing new game strategies.
For example,… no rule change brought about recruiting 6 2 to 4 players with high endurance, training them into running machines, then rotating them (as half the team) through the middle so they could keep running at top pace, all to accommodate the new things of press etc, and essentially turning our game into a facsimile of Basketball.
It’s the Coaches etc that do that, … and the rule changes are often (not always) knee jerk responses to those changes the Coaches make to the game.
Whole raft of reasons skills appear better today. Up until the mid 70’s, players were still running around in boots that laced up past the ankles, severely restricting the kicking action. This restriction to movement was why the drop kick was the kick of choice and the drop punt was hardly used. It was only after adopting the soccer style of shoe rather than a boot, that the drop punt became the default kicking style.
Now consider that the average suburban ground became an absolute mud pit once it started to rain. As of the 80’s, grounds really hadn’t benefited from the technology and drainage solutions available today.
The football was also a slightly different shape in the 60’s.
As for fitness, I honestly don’t think the average footballer today is faster or fitter than the average player back then. Today, they are managed far better in terms of time on ground and rest, allowing them to maintain a higher pace throughout the game, but the old time players generally either played the whole game or in the 80’s / 90’s would only interchange a dozen or so times a game in total. None of the current players for example would get close to say Craig Bradley for distance covered in a game, they just aren’t on the ground long enough. We can all point at a Lockett and his bulk, or Vanda going off and having a dart, but Stanton was a smoker and had just about the best endurance of any player to pull on the red & black. Lockett would still kick goals because he was a brilliant, straight kick and could take strong contested marks. He was also more mobile than his bulk implied.
As for Sr or Jr, it should be remembered that Ablett was 21 when he went to Hawthorn, then 23 when he went to Geelong after taking a year off. He effectively lost 4 years of football and is still one of the leading full forwards of all time. He played as a HFF for his first three years at Geelong. He currently sits 5th for goals scored, with the least games played of those over 1000 goals. He is one of only 8 players to average more than 4 goals a game and is fifth for average goals per season. See, I think Sr could have played Jr’s role, he is only an inch taller and about 10kg’s heavier, but in a midfield role would probably have dropped 5 of those. I don’t think Jr could ever play his old man’s game.
It’s obvious if you have players spending many hours each week running, skills training, weight training, match simulation, etc. and (often) getting well paid they are ‘better’ players than in yesteryear. Added to that they have also all sorts of coaches, nutritionists, physios, psychologists, doctors, etc. so it’s even less surprising. New technology - and I won’t labour it - has also lead to changes, too. Then we have the rules and the changes they’ve brought: interchange, first two, then three, now four coupled with a different approach to coaching, it’s not surprising how much the game has changed.
It’s certainly very different to the game in the 1970s. Whether or not it’s better, I’ll leave to others. It’s certainly more predictable, though.