I really doubt we could have just upped the tempo. We were doing the best we could in the conditions, we ran all our favourite plays and Hull shut every single one down. Take away the last minute Tomkins try and our only other try came from a dropped ball that happened to bounce our way (not taking anything away from Thornley's great finish). If we could have simply upped the tempo to score more we would have done.

It doesn't really matter anyway seeing as Hull couldn't keep hold of the ball, they could have played for another 80 minutes and not scored a try.

It was the worst final that I have watched but that was simply because Hull kept dropping the ball and so kept ending the contest. Yes, their defence was superb - and it was. They silenced Tomkins for example (which pretty much silences your attack) but that is only one half of the game and everyone watching wants to see a competitive match. Hull kept on undermining that by dropping the ball unopposed. They have some chokers in their team.

Ironically, the one player the RL media obsessed about prior to the game in Jamie Shaul ('should Gentle take the risk?') was Hull's best player. The youngest and least experienced on the field showed the most balls. Had his more experienced team mates done likewise then whatever the result and even if only two tries had been scored all game, the match would have been 100% more enjoyable than watching one team ruin it time and time again through their own irritating incompetence.

www.independent.co.uk/sport/gene ... 83750.html

www.independent.co.uk/sport/gene ... 83750.html

Moan moan moan - half of those on here I bet have attended no more than half a dozen games all season. Yet they bleat on about how badly the game is run, how badly it is played, attendance levels, facilities, referees.
What we are hearing are comments from a lot of people who think that RL started in 1996 and most of whom are purely armchair critics. Get up off your fat whining s and actually SUPPORT the game.
Do you whinge about everything, probably not. Not the most important things in life like poverty and child abuse, poor housing. Governments who are self serving thieves.
It's a fecking game! Support it or shut your yap!

That's a lot of assumptions there young man.

Are the Rhino and Gilbert different balls?

No idea. Gilbert are predominantly RU balls. Rhino are very different to the Steeden balls we've all used for years. When I saw 'different', I mean poor.

Thought the first half was ok, nothing special but Hull's defence was good to keep it to only 6. Second half was painful though, the one true exciting moment of the match....Shaul's break and Charnley's great save. Got to the point when we were guessing on which tackle Hull would drop the ball.

But lets just remember for those who say this shows the bad state the game/challenge cup is in......the Hull v Wire semi was a great contest. And I've seen many a final in other sports that were pretty dire, the 2010 football World Cup between Spain and Holland was pretty woeful with the only talking point the kung-fu tackling of the Dutch.

Let's see how many denials we get

So much pathetic in one post well done.


If we were I would.
Funny how we get the label of you but everyone else seem to do fine, do we have idiots? Of course we do, are you angels?
Funny how all the kicking off this year at the HJ has been away fans fighting either each other or stewards.

19? You think this is a rant because it's Wigan, get over yourself. The game was sh*te end of.

You've got one from me.

There have been severel grand finals in worse conditions than that, and have produces great games. The first ever grand final was very wet and was a low scoring scintillating slow burningintense classic.
So the weather can't be an excuse.
It was a very poor game and popular opinion seems track this up. Well done Wigan did what they had to do to win. Hull did what they had to do to lose.

Watched it back now. The last 25 minutes was garbage, Mainly put down to Hull constantly knocking on.

Defensivley Hull where very good. They kept us out repeatedly and the plays that very often come off for us got shut down by a very quick line speed from Hull and the backs not giving us a chance to get the ball out wide how we usually would. Some want to call it poor attacking play, I'd prefer to actually give Hull some credit for their defense. We could have had some shocking defence on show and ended up with a 42-38 scoreline for instance... but would that be down to good attacking play or shocking defence? which way do people want it?

Wigan played the conditions brilliantly and we're pretty much in control for the full 80 minutes thanks to a much better kicking game from Wigan and Hull's inability to just keep hold of the ball, Nearly everytime Hull kicked (if they got that far into a set) it went straight down the throat of Tomkins or a winger who nearly always brought it upto the 40 metre line. And when they started to try things it just didn't pay off at all and they usually just gifted us possesion with a clueless kick or a knock on.

It wasn't a classic but it was never ever going to be a high scoring thriller in those conditions. I'm quite sad that all Rugby League fans and the media can do on what was a showcase occasion is just moan. I think someone else mentioned that it was the first time in god knows how many years that a cup final has been played in those sorts of conditions. I think it was a charlton or luton game that had to be abandoned because of the weather and someone mentioned they very nearly called the nal game off too. But lets all just moan about how crap Rugby League is instead of accepting that conditions played a big part.

Just a bit confused i thought they'd been using gilbert this season