Law One: when it's wet/windy/muddy etc. get nose in front ... especially with say twenty minutes to go. When it's warm with firm ground and in the first half the plans change. Smithy's bright and will probably change his ways on this one.

if you want to go watch pens get kicked go to union games or wigan ive always said go for broke. unless its literally last kick/play the ball and you need 2 points to win/draw

Wigan needed to get a win to shut up a lot of pundits saying there not up to it this year and we got a draw not playing to well. I do not care if we take the two or not the coach and players to do what they feel is right at the time.

I wonder if this thread would exist if Simon Grix had got he ball down in the next set after that penalty. Or if Warrington put away any of the other chances they had in the last 15 minutes. The fact of the matter is, we missed our chances.

Matches tend to throw up slightly different dynamics and with these two I've got to agree with Ganson's and Browny. The opoposition taking the two showed a weakness, a lack of self belief that they could break through our line for max points. I think it actually gave our guys a boost

Games are not won and lost over one incident or decision.

I prefer us to run the ball. We will win more games than we lose this way

I've got to say IMO that quite often they are...especially tight games

95% of the time I'd run it. Wigan lost a couple of games lst year on the back of being negative.

In all honesty the 5% of times I'd go for 2 would be in situations like Wire found themselves in on Friday night. The scores tied up with around 15 minutes to go is a situation calling for the 2 IMO.

I'd have run ours before half time though.

If Wigan had run it instead of taking the two, I reckon they would have gone over. I thought it showed their lack of belief and I was relieved.

Games are also lost from penalties
my friend who went to the game with me said "we would have won of we taken the 2". As I mentioned to him and many other since, this is not true. If we kicked the penalty we would have had the ball back, we coudld have then dropped the ball on the kick off and they could of then got a try.

Basically, if we kicked for a penalty and got it then everything after it would have a been a completly different outcome...we could have won / lost / drawn

These close finishes really attract the punter to the game, so why not change the conversion law to give the option to the side scoring a try whether they take time off the clock to do this. I have been to many games where one side is winning by 10 points with 2 mins to go and the game as gone because the clock will be run down. If there are 12 tries in a game, 12 minutes is taken away from the game to watch a bloody kick. On the opposite side of the coin if a side winning by 4 points score a try in 78 minutes then they can allow the clock to run its course, as a reward of scoring a try. What do you think??? I agree in those conditions to get ahead on the scoreboard.

Wigans decision to take the two was right on half time, so I would say that was the correct decision, and I guess most teams would have done the same.

If we start taking the two constantly then I can see the game turning into union. Boring, with a try almost unheard of.

Didn't Leeds take two against us in the CC final when our backs were against the wall? Not long after it started bombing it down?