Serious question here (no trolling, I think you guys know I don't do that), do you think you played that well for the majority of the first half even with a full team?

I ask that because I was surprised how slowly you started the game and I felt we'd missed a big opportunity in the first twenty minutes to be a couple of scores up. You had a purple patch for ten minutes but then lost your way for the last ten minutes of the half. I didn't see the usual intensity from your forwards and Higham didn't have any room to move. The offloads weren't really flowing either which surprised me.

We very nearly folded like a deck of cards during that ten minute spell but outside of that we looked as comfortable for 70 minutes as we have done against you guys in a very long time.

It was a really strange game. I couldn't believe that on the balance of play we were 16-2 down but I was even more surprised that you didn't go on with it. I said to the lads with me at 16-2 that we'd get 50 put on us because when Wire get on a roll they're the best side in the league.

Grand final defeats are tough to take (we had 3 in 4 years between 2000-2003) but it doesn't half make the victories more satisfying. With the backing you have and the coach you have you'll win one before long.

we had higham at right centre for a bit as well.

just seen the obstruction penalty, that was a ing joke as well. cummins is sayin how you only have to run behind your own player, how many times a week do you see a mazey run from acting half running behind stationary players and not getting penalized for it?

And Saints are the ugly fat bird left sitting at a table with a half of mild?

I understand your points, Ditas, but, we could have (and should have) coped with Joel's injury.
Forward (1 of the 4 subs, not (imo) a good idea) comes on, Grix drops to centre, and original centre goes onto wing. WE SHOULD HAVE BE ABLE TO COPE. We didn't.
I could tell the teams mental strength just "turned off" when that injury occured, and that's what killed us. WE SWITCHED OFF AS A TEAM.
The set of six which resulted in Goulding's try was (from memory) just poor attempts at tackling. We treaded water til half-time, and looked like we were going through the motions early in the second half, well before Ratch's injury.

As I said on page 1, masters of our own downfall.
I'd have expected more from Smith/Poaching/Marshall etc to marshall our troops better, between Joel's injury and Wigan's 2nd try (before Stef's injury). Stef's injury was the nail in the coffin. We were mentally shot at before.

there was a moment that summed up our structure and the rest of the night to follow for wire.

Around 10-15 mins into the 2nd half, there was a scrum about 10 off our line....

The front row packed, but nobody else for a minute....

All our players were looking around wondering who was playing in the back row....

Briers ended up getting in the pack himself!!

were we defending?

From what I've read/heard, Joel woke up in the ambulance. Whether this is true or not, nobody can see a team mate/friend in that situation and not have it play on their minds for a while. It would only be natural if our players finished the half, went through the interval and even into the 2nd half with their thoughts quite possibly more on Joels condition than the job in hand.

Unfortunately injuries are part of the game.

All of those Warrington players will of experienced players being taken from the field before but as pro-rugby league player's they must adjust to unexpected changes.

I hope Joel a speedy recovery, his try was superb.

You have to be ready for anything and everything. Saints lost wellens in 2002, wigan lost richards in 2010. Both teams won. Champions teams find a way.

Wire don't have the versatility in the backrow to allow players to slot into the centres (allowing the centre to cover wing/fullback) So they should have had a back on the bench. You have hogdson on the bench and if all is going well you have an experienced head who allows ratchford to move up into the halves if the game needs a change, or you have a plan b if things go tits up like last night. For example, had leeds had the same situation they would have been able to cope more adequatley because 2 of the backrowers delany and ablett are both good centres so it would have been easy to re-jig the backline. Other teams have the same which is why they don't have a 'utility player' on tghe bench.

If your backrowers can't really play centre and you have no utility or back on the bench you are asking for trouble, and smith got it.

And yet Saints managed to lose four grand finals in a row, and Leeds lost five Challenge Cup finals in recent times: if they were champion teams how come they didn't find a way to win them?

I'll try to be fair in my view here.

I'm not sure it was the two injuries that really were the pivotal aspects on Saturday. As a wigan I thought we were in control of the game until you made your subs in the first half. In the first 20 minutes wigan blew 3 clear chances to score. The first try from wire came against a run of wigan dominating and then for ten minutes you blew us off the park.

After that your forwards were clearly tired and all that wigan needed was a try to keep themselves in. The key to wigan winning this was to make it a contest. Warrington have the stronger team but it's clear for all to see that they blow teams out early because there isn't the stamina to dominate the top teams for the whole match. At the 50th minute I commented that wire were already flat out and I quietly thought it may have been our day.

I'm not sure that the injuries were key as a number of Wigans trys came from carving wire up down the middle. We also scored twice down our right hand side where we had been creating opportunities all game. The only other try was Richards which by then the match was over.

thanks for trying to be fair.


I'd hate to see you NOT trying to be fair

fookin ell

Your wrong. I honestly believe our forwards were walking all over yours in the first 30ish minutes. We were easily making 40 / 50 yds each set. Your opportunities came from structured attacks within your own half, generally against the run of play.

Plus also, please name me one side who has the 'stamina to dominate top teams for the whole match' please? Does this comment suggest that Wigan can? Id like to investigate this a little further if you don't mind. In my mind 'dominating a top team for the whole match' would mean lots of points scored against not many conceded? Would you agree? I mean, you could say that a team could be dominant with possession without scoring lots of points but is that really dominant? You could equally say that a team could be dominant with field position without scoring lots of points but, again, would that be truly dominant?

So top teams would be Hudds, Us, Leeds and you? Ok, well you didn't dominate us in the 1st half of the final and didn't beat us the rest of the season, so you couldn't dominate us for any matches let alone whole matches. Hudds beat you twice in the league and, if I remember rightly, were on top for the first 10 / 20 mins of your playoff game, so you didn't dominate them for any full games. You are 2 wins from four against Leeds and, given your biggest winning margin was only 10 points that would also suggest that you didn't dominate them either for any full games.

Unless, when you say big teams, you mean Salford, London or Widnes? In which case I'd accept that you were dominant for a couple of games.

I think you make a very good point about the Wire mentally switching off after that third try. The celebrations and Westwood kissing to the camera was illustrative of a team that thought that they had the game won. And Briers is a typical English half back. When his forwards are dominate, he looks very good. When he does not have the time, he looks gash.

Another who thinks that having to re-shape your back-line after two injuries with a bench of four forwards to replace them didn't lead to the loss of the game is clearly high.

I have also heard that one of the other players we had on the pitch also suffered an injury that should have led to him being replaced but circumstances meant he couldn't be.