So, pictured here is the St George Illawarra Rugby League side. This collection is apparently what footballers look like these days.
What is inescapably, immediately evident is that these blokes are spending a bloody lot of time at the gym.
Things have certainly changed, and demonstrably so: A recent English study focused on Rugby Union, but acknowledging a fairly straight parallel in Rugby League, has shown that between 1955 and 2015 the average body mass of the players has increased by 25 per cent. That's quite an astounding figure when you think about it; players have grown in size by a quarter!
The study found that a major turning point was in 1995 with the introduction of professionalism meaning that, presumably, footballers who used to have jobs were now, instead, lifting weights.
It also found that the most notable growth was in the backs, who are now bigger than the forwards used to be.
The obvious worrying upshot of all this brawn is the increased injury rates.
These rates are much harder to find statistics for but their rise is taken, pretty much, as a given by those most closely involved in the game.
As the report states, "increases in body mass, speed and fitness are not matched by parallel increases in the tensile strength of bone, tendons and ligaments".
Are we getting better quality football with it? I would say absolutely not, but I imagine there'd be no shortage of people who'd disagree with me.
The thing is, the players aren't just bigger than they used to be; they're bigger than the rest of the population. They no longer much resemble us. We're watching our game being played by what amounts to virtually another life form.
Does that make it more interesting or less? You tell me.
The players aren't just bigger than they used to be; they're bigger than the rest of the population. They no longer much resemble us ... we're watching our game being played by what amounts to virtually another life form
The other thing worth pointing out is that those blokes in the photo? They came second-last in last year's competition, which indicates an older wisdom to me - that a lot of what makes good footballers is more dependent on what's going on between their ears.
BAT UP OR DOWN?
Given how well he's going it's hardly surprising that Steve Smith's technique has been getting some looking at, particularly the movement of his right foot across to off-stump. What has been surprisingly largely uncommented upon however has been Smith's utilisation of the increasingly popular "bat-up" approach.
Cricketing Australians, until quite recent times, have always tapped their bat on the ground until the bowler is well into the delivery stride. Smith instead awaits the delivery with his bat already raised behind him, like a baseballer. Warner does the same, as do a considerable number of our other batsmen.
Greg Chappell has called it "a revolution that is changing batting like it's never changed before in the history of the game".
It began with the likes of Graham Gooch and Tony Greig in the mid to late '70s, and so tended to be considered a type of minor English quirk. But then sometime around 2003 Mike Hussey took it up and in the process went from being a bit of a plodder to a Test batsman with an average climbing towards Bradman's.
People took notice and other Australian batsmen began experimenting.
Chappell is not a fan. He reckons that by beginning with your bat in a set raised position you are limiting the ways in which it can come down again. He says that the traditional bat-down approach encourages superior fluidity, particularly with your footwork, and allows for a greater variety of shot-making.
History would tend to support him. Garfield Sobers, Chappell himself, Doug Walters, Viv Richards, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting ... the batsmen we've most enjoyed watching - all "bat-down".
Still, Steve Smith is providing a pretty convincing argument for the alternative.
Where it gets interesting is in the coaching end of things. Cricket NSW, for example, has no instructional policy for juniors on which way to go. They advise, basically, to go with whichever way you're comfortable.
With Smith as the role model for young cricketers that his form dictates he must be, the old bat-down may well go the way of the eight-ball over.
The latest sports cheating scandal takes us to the United States, to the Houston Astros who narrowly went down in last season's World Series final.
They don't do things by halves the Yanks - no just zapping down to Bunnings for a bit of sandpaper.
The Astros used a secret camera focused on the opposing catcher and, more pointedly, the instructional hand signals he makes to his pitcher to tell him what type of pitch he wants.
The close-up images of the catcher's signals were sent to the Astros' tunnel where they were decoded by a member of their staff who then - and this is the funny part - alerted the batters as to what type of pitch they'd be receiving by bashing a rhythmic pattern on a rubbish bin in the dugout.
Another example of the "win-at-all-costs" mentality invading our sporting world.