It's as if Wiganers don't actually watch the game. A comparison of packs is almost futile as both sides play different games. Wigan's forwards play on the edge. The vast majority of their metres comes through their second rowers. Their props offer little. I'm sure their 'props' in the Grand Final contributed similar to what Luke Thompson offered on his own for St Helens. Clubb, Flower and Crosby against Amor, Masoe and Walmsley ?!?! Ats not even a contest. Saints bullied Wigan's front row and did it twice last year. Masoe, in particular, set the tone massively in both games. A big part of why Wigan are obsessively stock piling props is, IMO, entirely because Wane knows to beat Saints, their props are going to need to compete. Can't rely on Liam Farrell and your threequarters for all your go forward.

It is remiss of any Wiganer to seriously tell Saints fans that Wigan's pack is 'better'. Kyle Amor is the best prop on both sides by an absolute mile. In fact, Masoe, Walmsley and Amor would all make Wigan's 17 every time.

Wigan have an excellent structure, are excellent in the backs with the exception of Gelling, and supremely aggressive defence. Player for player, they aren't all that at all. O'Loughlin is the real star of both sides.

No worries and cheers for the apology!

Yeah, I could have worded that better. I meant by implication that we had a lot of players out including first choice pack members. If memory serves I think we were missing both first choice hookers in McIlorum and Williams, Farrell, Flower and Pettybourne out plus Tomkins still wasn't fit after re-signing. In addition it was the first game back after injury for Bateman, O'Loughlin and possibly Crosby (although I'm not 100% on that one). I can't remember if there were any others to be honest but I think it does show that the pack wasn't even close to full strength. Just the losses of Flower, McIllorum and Farrell alone seriously weakens the pack and, in particular, it's hard to overestimate the loss of McIlorum when going up against a team with Roby in it. IIRC we had that many missing we actually debuted Doran at hooker in that game wearing squad number 42!!

I agree that the two packs play in a completely different way, and therefore, in some aspects, direct comparison is futile. The way we use O'Loughlin as a 3rd pivot is probably the biggest single illustration of the different approaches. However the original point (from Pete I think) was that the Saints pack, as a rule, was bossed by the more aggressive Wigan pack (we'll add the caveat 'when both were at full strength' lol) and I'm not sure how that is affected by direct comparisons, especially man for man. You mention that the Wigan pack plays at the edge and that is certainly true. It's that aspect that the Saints pack seems to struggle with, certainly in recent seasons. That's something that was highlighted time and again on this very board prior to the last 2 games between us; when the going got tough, the Saints pack seemed unable to step up. Nathan Brown intimated as much himself after the Good Friday defeat. Whether there has been a sea change in attitude since these last two games remains to be seen as, as I've been at pains to point out, the 2 packs haven't met head on and close to full strength in them but even so, there does seem to have been a change in attitude. I think that was evident from the opening couple minutes of the GF! It's a shame, in some respects, that Flower lost the plot as it would have been interesting to see how that developed. Anyoo, that's history but I'm sure we'll find out over the coming season!

As to your other point, I think that's coming from a Saints perspective. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, and I doubt you'll get many dissenters on this board, but from a Wigan point of view only Amor would definitely make the Wigan 17. I like Walmsley but he isn't, at this stage of his career, as good as Flower or Taylor and, on last years form, no better than Clubb. Masoe is not a Wigan prop full stop. We've been there with Feka and it's not Wane's, or Maguire's before him, style! Now you could argue that Masoe is better than Feka and I certainly wouldn't put up an argument but the fact is a better Feka is still a Feka and that's not what Wane is looking for. Back to Walmsley for a second; he has all the attributes to go on and be a top class prop and I hope he fulfils his undoubted potential. But to project this discussion into 2015; We've added Mossop to replace Taylor and added Patrick and Tautai, both of whom are very much in the Wane mould, which means Walmesley would have to get in the team above Mossop, Flower, Tautai, Patrick, Clubb and Crosby (who was as good for us last season as Walmsley was for you). I've not included Pettybourne (as Walmsley is better) or Greenwood and Sutton (as they are relatively unproven at this level despite being excellent prospects). You might think he'd get in ahead of some of those, and you might be right...who knows? However to say ''would make the Wigan 17 every time' is stretching it a bit! You're basically saying that Wane would only choose one of his current props if he could have the Saints props instead. That's clearly not very likely!

I understand what your saying, but Masoe would get into the side every time Pettybourne is in the Wigan side, Masoe is an ongoing argument on here, similar to Pettybourne on the Wigan site, but Masoes best is ahead of Pettybournes imo. As for Walmsley, I'd of had Taylor ahead of him, but I'm not sure about the rest.

Speaking more generally about Wigans signings, I don't actually think your signings improve your absolute best, and only Tautai (whom I'm not convinced by) having the potential to bring an extra dimension. What they do bring is rotation without any depreciable drop in performance. I maintain that next year will be the same as this year, in that Saints absolute best is better than Wigans, but Wigan will be closer to that level far more often (all imo), with the possible exception of Warrington though, on paper Saints and Wigan are in a league of their own next year...

Phuzzy, I'll tread carefully as you seem like you genuinely believe what you're writing and are at least trying but honestly, how much rugby do you watch ? I mean, other than Wigan, in a genuinely unbalanced manner - how much do you watch ? Because seriously, anybody telling me that Walmsley is not as good as Taylor and Flower and is on a par with Clubb can't watch a lot.

A prop's job on a rugby league field is metres, primarily. Their job is to provide the territory and go forward for their backs to play. The best are able to offer that go forward with a real work rate in defence on top, such as James Graham for example. Now, since a prop's role is so clear, it can be measured by statistics. Here are some for you to consider (and seriously, consider them because they make your theory sound ridiculous).

So, Walmsley is not as good as Taylor or Flower. Here are the average metres made per game by all three -

Walmsley - 108m.
Flower - 68m.
Taylor - 79m

Clubb, who Walmsley is on a par with averages 71m a game.

Here are how many carries a game that these props average. How often they're prepared to cart it up -

Walmsley - 13.
Flower - 10.
Taylor - 10.
Clubb - 9.

Here are the tackles they average. Their defensive work rate per game -

Walmsley - 17.
Flower - 26.
Taylor - 20.
Clubb - 19.

Tackle busts. How many times a game do these guys put themselves in position to win the floor, get quick ball for their backs.

Walmsley - 2.7.
Flower - 1.4.
Taylor - 2.3.
Clubb - 1.7.

Basically, Walmsley makes more metres, offers more carries and wins the floor more often whilst his Wigan counterparts offer more tackles in a game of which many will be second and third man in, in line with Wane's emphasis on controlling the ruck.

With this in mind, Phuzzy, are you still seriously going to try and tell me that Walmsley is not as good as any of these props ? Seriously ?

Here are Crosby's, who's another you assert was Walmsley's equal last season.

Metres per game - 73m.
Carries - 10.
Tackles - 20.
Busts - 0.7.

Good stats mate and good post.


It with eve interesting if you could put Mose in with them and see his stats. Walmsley has come in for critisim on here for not playing well yet Mose is seen as the worlds greatest prop. I think those stats prove that big Alex is a good prop.

Mose:

82m per game
10 carries per game
15 tackles per game
2.1 busts per game

Quote: St pete "Does that make big Alex the best prop in the world ? Refer to 1:22 in this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3K312eIyrg

Quote: St pete "Does that make big Alex the best prop in the world ? Refer to 1:22 in this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3K312eIyrg

Mose was starting at back end of the year with walmsley coming off the bench. Both play short mins. What constitutes being a impact prop ?

Firstly, was there any need for the first bit of the post? As it happens I've been watching rugby for over 20 years and a home and away supporter for much of that time. I'm guessing I've seen more rugby than you, although not knowing you personally, I obviously couldn't say for sure.

As to the rest of the post; impressive stats for Walmsley indeed. I've no issue with him being an excellent player and an exciting prospect but, as you say yourself, it's not always possible to make direct comparisons in that way. The 2 packs play completely different roles and, as is quite plain from those stats, the Wigan props all have a very similar workrate in line with that. Our metres come from the back row and centres more than prop and we are able to do that because of the very aggressive way the front row play and the manner in which they lay the platform. There's more than one way to skin a cat SLS! It's interesting that the main area he falls short of the Wigan props (and by that I mean ALL the Wigan props including Crosby!) is in defence. Telling, no? It's this blitzkrieg style of defence that we're referring to when we comment on the aggressiveness of the Wigan pack and, let's be honest, even the stats don't tell the whole story here! Do you have the percentage missed tackles for them to hand? I think I can say without contradiction that if Walmsley played in the Wigan pack he'd be expected to up his defensive workrate considerably and not only that, be expected to hit harder and more consistently. I'm sure you know as well as I do what that extra workload would do to his metres made, tackle bust and carries per game stats. Like I say, I have no problem with you championing Walmsley; I agree with much of what you say about him. But to say he's better than Flower, Taylor and Clubb is just opinion. Only if he played for the same team in the same systems and then, and only then, boast better stats would that cease to be the case.

As for Masoe, you're still wrong. Pettybourne is capable of playing long minutes. Masoe isn't. It's no secret that that is Wane's way. Pettybourne wouldn't have played half as much as he did anyway were it not for Taylor falling out of favour so even if we accept that Masoe and Pettybourne are like for like in terms of the type of prop they are (which isn't necessarily the case) to suggest Masoe would 'make the Wigan 17 every time' is simply not true. Given the option, Wane would go for the workhorse type of prop over the Masoes of this world without exception.

It's hard not to turn this into a 'our's are better than your's' type debate which I've no real desire to do. I agree that Amor would be a shoe in and I'm even happy to concede Walmsley is there or thereabouts. For the sake of argument let's say he would at the very least be in contention and get plenty games. However that is a long way from what you were implying in that post. Masoe is not a Wigan prop, full stop. That's not based on some sort of misguided club loyalty but on seeing Wigan week in, week out and being a season ticket holder for over 20 years. Trust my judgement on that or not; it's up to you.

Edit: Sorry, meant to mention speed of play the ball and winning the ruck defensively which I have little doubt the Wigan 4 do better than Walmsley too, but I'm sure you get the gist!

That's a fair point Pete that I also think is relevant to the stats discussion elsewhere on this thread.

THe premise I have is that Saints don't have a method. At least this season they did not. With Milward we played off the back of fast attacking plays. Blowing sides off the park in short 20 minute bursts.

Under Anderson we defended everything thrown at us.

In the intervening years we had a mixture of styles but with no dominate way to play the game against other teams.

Under Brown we adapted our play week to week, team to team. There were moments where we blew sides apart, others where we played a very defensive game. I think the change in styles each week is tricky for players to play under. You have to be adaptable and the injuries did not help either and so occasionally we just looked like we did not know what we doing and got our backsides handed to us.

Wigan on the other hand do have a very strong defensive ethos, they can blow a side a way, by keeping them pegged back for the first 20 - 30 minutes. But I also think if you can match them in that opening salvo, stopping their attack in the same fashion that is when they can come undone. Holding them to a tight game means it then comes down to attacking players making the difference in the last 20 minutes of a game and even Wigans defense can't tackle for a full 80.