2008 vs. 2003

In little more than a week, the Reds have played their two toughest matches: scoring a gritty draw against Widnes—the club expected to be our closest challengers for the title, despite the 10-point deduction—and being taught a lesson by the hands and boots of Super League’s Wakefield Trinity. Yet, at present, Salford remain top of National League One and favourites for the Northern Rail Cup. It might seem daft, but there are disgruntled voices among the faithful. Plenty of these aren’t new dissents—scorned by two disappointing home performances. They have been around all season. Begging the pointless but no less intriguing question: Is the 2008 team better than the 2003 team?

I reckon plenty of you have done this comparision since the end of last season, and will do up until the end of this term. Did this season’s signings match up to those of 2003? Do the 2008 team play better rugby than the collective of five years ago? Can this year’s boys dominate like the all-conquering 2003 squad? There are differences in each team, as there is in the intensity of their relative competitions. You can make plenty of comparisons, arguments and counter-arguments to whom you believe was/is the better team. When you really think about it, there’s not much in it.

However, I’m yet to be convinced that the team of 2008 has yet to attain the grit and steel to overcome adverse situations like the 2003 team did. Would the 2003 team have capitulated as the 2008 team did in the aforementioned games? Am I being harsh? We’ll see… Let us hope that [perceived] class prevails.