THE end of season brought the curtain down on the 20th Super League and there will be plenty reading this wondering where that time has gone.

Does it really seem that long ago that Bobbie Goulding was running around Knowsley Road on a baking-hot August bank holiday, holding the inaugural Super League trophy above his head.

I half expected there to be a bit more song and dance about the competition’s significant landmark – or maybe they are saving the cake and candles budget for next year’s coming of age.

That said, it was only right that the celebration this year was rugby league’s 120 year anniversary – as much as some make out the sport did not begin when super replaced rugby in the sport's elite level.

All of those 20 years have brought something to remember– and not always for the better.

And I reckon we can put the margin metre, the Blu Sox monicker, Paris St Germain, the momentum rule and countdown clock in Room 101 along with Super League milk.

Times have changed remarkably quickly since that maiden, first-past-the-post season with only Saints, Leeds, Wigan and Warrington being involved in all 20.

The first season brought us more than stripey socks.

Yes, 1996 was a phenomenal one for Saints – a double winning season that stopped the Wigan juggernaut dead in its tracks.

Of course, we all recall that first Wembley win in 20 years and league title in 21.

But how many of us recall how good the football was we played that season?

Off season, and all that, I jumped on to You Tube last week to watch Saints’ narrow win over Warrington at Wilderspool in May 96.

It was a cracking match, settled by Ian Pickavance running on to Derek McVey’s offload to saunter unopposed under the sticks.

A few things jump up from that game, not least what an outstanding footballer Steve Prescott was, on both sides of the ball.

The other was how seriously good was Keiron Cunningham as a 19-year-old?

But as the final whistle went I had that disappointed feeling that the game is just not like that anymore.

Sure, there is no other sport I would want to watch more than rugby league. However, as a spectacle there are aspects of the game that have been eroded – ironically as coaching and defensive systems have improved – and the game, although still great, is poorer as a spectacle.

There may be an element of rose-tinted glasses here – after all it was a highlights package.

But the first thing that strikes you is how deep the attack is. Goulding is the ringmaster and the players run on to the ball, make yards and look to pierce the line.

The second is the defence; there are only two men needed to complete each tackle, with no third man coming in using the Mick McManus school of dark arts to slow things down.

So where did that game go?

Is it all down to improving fitness, better coaching, scrutiny of players weaknesses, the multiple interchanges reducing the element of duress and all teams falling before the altar of completion, completion, completion?

Some would point to the crowd figures and say, "Well the fans seem to like it!"

In a results based industry I can see why some of the off the cuff stuff is downplayed now.

The fans would be no less forgiving than the coach if a wingman tries and fails to skin his opposite number on the outside early on in the tackle, or if the scrum half fancies a chip over the encroaching defence on play two.

But that is not what I am talking about - more the basic attack and defensive techniques employed during the course of a standard 80 minutes.

I usually hark back to a time before Super League, but for now 1996 would be a good start for me.