"Life on Mars" WOOF style - the current Doggies play in 1973

[Dry Rot]

Some of you will know this fine BBC show currently being repeated on ABC TV but if you don't, the basic premise is that Sam Tyler, a cop from 2006 gets run over and wakes up in the same place (Manchester), doing the same work but in 1973.

The cop station in 1973 reflects the times: sexist, corrupt, everyone smoking at their desk etc ie the values, fashions etc of the times then. My avatar is his mighty boss, DCI Hunt.

But what if this happened to you this year - early in the season, you are walking to a Dogs game at Telstra Dome and like Sam Tyler you are run over, only to wake up in 1973 outside Victoria Park for a Pies v Dogs game, and like Sam Tyler have to confront that 1973 footy world.

It's the VFL, not AFL. There's no interstate teams and you'll be watching the Dogs play other Vic teams at their respective then home grounds.

There's no modern day bench.

There's only one umpire and no video umpire. Anything goes, behind play.

But best of all, you're not watching the '73 Scray team go round, but the 2006 Dogs team playing in the 1973 VFL.

How would they go?

I'd hope that Harris & Hargrave would put a few players in hospital, but what about the other way round? How would say Johnno and Cooney go in that comp?

And how would you enjoy, Sam Tyler style, being a modern day supporter returning to those old suburban VFL grounds in 1973?

[LostDoggy]

Oooh. A TRUE hypothetical and not another one of those "will Minson make it as FF in '08" type threads. Lovely.

My imagination tells me that the Dogs circa 2006, playing the way they did in 2006, will kill every other team in the VFL, because every single one of our players will be faster, fitter, more skilled and professional than any player in '73, and we will win our second premiership only 19 years after our first.

On one proviso:

That our skinny runts can run fast enough to stay away from stray elbows and flailing fists and big fellas on their lunch break from the local abbatoir (hang on, wasn't that us anyway?) and thus keep all our players on the park.

Which, as it turns out, was actually Rocket's plan in '06 anyway.

Funny how the more things change, the more they stay the same.

[LostDoggy]

There's only one umpire and no video umpire.

ps. We have video umpires now? Boy, KB's really got that rules committee working overtime.

[Dry Rot]

Oooh. A TRUE hypothetical and not another one of those "will Minson make it as FF in '08" type threads. Lovely.

My imagination tells me that the Dogs circa 2006, playing the way they did in 2006, will kill every other team in the VFL, because every single one of our players will be faster, fitter, more skilled and professional than any player in '73, and we will win our second premiership only 19 years after our first.

On one proviso:

That our skinny runts can run fast enough to stay away from stray elbows and flailing fists and big fellas on their lunch break from the local abbatoir (hang on, wasn't that us anyway?) and thus keep all our players on the park.

Which, as it turns out, was actually Rocket's plan in '06 anyway.

Funny how the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Thanks Lantern, I too like odd threads like this and welcome to WOOF.

I also wonder about the bold bits. Yes, modern day players are faster and more skilful, but how long would they last in 1973?

And what of the spectators? Would a 1973 Lantern enjoy the suburban VFL footy more than the 2006 Lantern going to corporate Telstra Dome?

[hujsh]

One thing that would help us is that their tall players were shorter than the modern tall player. I saw the 1989 Grand Final and the 188cm Dunstal lined up on the 186cm Tim Darcy (according to channel 7). Maybe this was an anomaly but i was surprised. Griffin is taller than Geelong's full back! In fact Peter Street may of had a chance to be really solid at least with 211cm as his listed height.

We would get smashed in a wet match.

[LostDoggy]

Thanks Lantern, I too like odd threads like this and welcome to WOOF.

I also wonder about the bold bits. Yes, modern day players are faster and more skilful, but how long would they last in 1973?

And what of the spectators? Would a 1973 Lantern enjoy the suburban VFL footy more than the 2006 Lantern going to corporate Telstra Dome?

They would last as long as they did in 2006: All day if Westy and Crossy keep winning inside ball and feeding it out to our twenty outside Olympic sprint champions in space a la our first final vs Collingwood, and not long at all if they get caught and thrown around the park a la our second final vs West Coast.

---

Oooh, suburban footy vs. the Dome. Such a loaded topic, often discussed with great emotion, but objectively there are certainly pros and cons to both. Yes, there is a certain charm to standing on a grassy hill drinking hot milo from a thermos while dodging inaccurate drop-kicking, but the roof is certainly a Godsend on those wild and woolly days we Melbournites pretend to love so much. It is kinda fun, too, in a corporate, soulless kind of way, to have the same seats every year and sit next to the same old granny you've sat next to since the Dome opened up and watch Welsh/Judd/Riewoldt destroy us from the same angle every year. I refuse to pay sixty dollars for a meat pie though -- did anyone say ripoff? -- and I still drink hot milo from my thermos at quarter time.

[LostDoggy]

One thing that would help us is that their tall players were shorter than the modern tall player. I saw the 1989 Grand Final and the 188cm Dunstal lined up on the 186cm Tim Darcy (according to channel 7). Maybe this was an anomaly but i was surprised. Griffin is taller than Geelong's full back! In fact Peter Street may of had a chance to be really solid at least with 211cm as his listed height.

We would get smashed in a wet match.

We would absolutely get killed in a wet match. It would be a slaughterhouse of Homeric proportions. Farran Ray, Cam Wight, little Lynch (I know, I know, he wasn't around in 2006), skinny Everitt etc. would be broken in half and buried head first in the sloshing mud.

And the beautiful soul of Rob Murphy will be amputated, along with both his medial ligaments, by a thumping cement wall masquerading as a full-back.

Oh God, I wouldn't even want to imagine what would happen to Jordy.

[Sockeye Salmon]

We would win every game by 20 goals.


I'd still have Sockeye in the back pocket.

Oh, and I'd keep an eye on that Templeton kid, I reckon he'll be alright one day.

[mjp]

We would get smashed in a wet match.

I actually think we would win in the wet by even more. The fact that todays players actually deliver the ball to a team-mate rather than just kicking it down the line becomes even more meaningful in poor conditions...in the wet, skill is more important than ever. It allows you to maximise scoring chances.

I think the 'old boys' would take more contested marks on a dry day though - they certainly practised that skill (in games) a lot, lot more.

The modern players would be stupified by the number of free-kicks paid (around 80 per game in 1970 I think). The old boys would not believe the players kicking backwards, across ground etc to set up a lose man and would not be able to deal with it.

As for putting players in hospital, the sheer size of the modern players - yes, even our ones - would cause havoc in 1973.

[hujsh]

I actually think we would win in the wet by even more. The fact that todays players actually deliver the ball to a team-mate rather than just kicking it down the line becomes even more meaningful in poor conditions...in the wet, skill is more important than ever. It allows you to maximise scoring chances.

I think the 'old boys' would take more contested marks on a dry day though - they certainly practised that skill (in games) a lot, lot more.

The modern players would be stupified by the number of free-kicks paid (around 80 per game in 1970 I think). The old boys would not believe the players kicking backwards, across ground etc to set up a lose man and would not be able to deal with it.

As for putting players in hospital, the sheer size of the modern players - yes, even our ones - would cause havoc in 1973.

It's more the mud that would kill us. We would really have to fight for the ball and if we won it we couldn't run well and would have to bomb it.

No grounds are really muddy these days.

[Mofra]

First things first - little Ian Collins & Ross Oakley, meet Mr Crowbar. Oops, sorry

I'd leave a few memos to help the club out - drop Neil Sasche for one particular game, start investing club money into small companies like Westfield & BHP...

I too think a modern side would destroy an old side. Thuggery will only help so much, you still need to find the footy & put the ball betwen the sticks. "Small" players like the 187cm, 90kg Farren Ray would destroy some of the old wingmen, and Skipper & Minson would no longer be under sized ruckman.

[Dry Rot]

What were the top 4 VFL sides of 1973?

How would the 2006 Dogs go against each? Match-ups?

[Mantis]

I actually think we would win in the wet by even more. The fact that todays players actually deliver the ball to a team-mate rather than just kicking it down the line becomes even more meaningful in poor conditions...in the wet, skill is more important than ever. It allows you to maximise scoring chances.

Spot on.

When I was growing up watching footy at a cold and wet Western Oval I used to marvel at the skills of Doug Hawkins. He was a superb wet weather footballer. He was probably our most skilful player on a dry day, but was easily our most skilful on a wet day. He was a great chest mark as he used to get his body between the ball and his opponent.

From the modern players someone who fits into this category is Akermanis who excels in the wet as only the most skilful and clever players can execute there game in the wet.

[LostDoggy]

What were the top 4 VFL sides of 1973?

How would the 2006 Dogs go against each? Match-ups?

Carlton and Richmond were the top 2.
The 73 GF was a huge shoot out in scoring and I think its the one where the tigers went the knuckle. I might be mixing up my years with 72.

[Mantis]

Carlton and Richmond were the top 2.
The 73 GF was a huge shoot out in scoring and I think its the one where the tigers went the knuckle. I might be mixing up my years with 72.

1973 GF:

Carlton 2.2 7.6 9.9 12.14 (86)

Richmond 3.5 11.8 15.11 16.20 (116)

1972 was the high scoring game.

Carlton 8.4 18.6 25.9 28.9 (177)

Richmond 5.4 10.9 15.15 22.18 (150)