So which part of p1ss poor both weeks was you struggling with? And also wigan scoring 50 at headingly wasnt expected as nor was us blowing them off the pitch in first 20 in what was poor conditions.

warrington allways play well in parts of games and usually rack up points quickly, and last night you was close to full strength at home we was nowhere near full strengh and away.

Makes no difference. It's far harder putting fifty on the champions on their own turf than it is racking up thirty odd at home against them even in poor weather conditions.

the last time we played, your forwards was nowhere near dominating. he said he wouldn't take westwood over hansen and i wouldnt to be honest because hansen plays so well in are pack im not sure westwood have the same effect. there is a difference wigans star player is the best player in superleague and young your best player is old with dodgey knees who looked poor when he came back this season. also it wasn't just sam tomkins missing against widnes, i would actually compaire tomkins effect the same as briers to warringtons.

like i said last season i actually believed warrington was better than wigan and was expecting to win nothing with warrington taking it all this season i feel different and wigan look far stronger and more youthful nothing to do with form. but i still think you could beat us just not as worried this season.

yes but the point was that i thought our win was the most impressive, yes wigan were under strength but st judes under 12's wouldnt have had much problem with leeds pack last week. We have in the past struggled badly in the rain with lots of dropped ball and i thought last night would be the same but we went out and demolished the team which are still the current SL champions in horrendous weather whilst still playing our normal game.

As you have said 3 times now. I dont think you are going many people agreeing with you though on the Wigan website.

lol i think your right, dont normally post on other teams boards but thought i would add my opinion to this topic. Think i'll quit now whilst i can.

its nothing to do with points either its more the way are teams perform against other teams. all this peaking stuff is a myth just look at 2010 season went through the season "Peaking" majority of the season, if your a well coached team with good players this peaking crap doesn't come into it.

also the warrington learned the lesson from last season is alot of poopie aswell your team have just got a little bit older and weaker this season.

the same packed played against you last night!!

Playing above themselves - I see what you did there. Amusing.

The problem your 2006 side has in terms of claims to greatness is that it faced little or no real opposition. That season was a real low point for SL. Your win was overshadowed to a degree by the interest in Wigan's battle against relegation, such was the lack of interest in the competition. I stand to be corrected but I don't think even your own fans turned out in large numbers to watch you that season.

The fact is that you topped the table by 8 points from Hull. Leeds, Wigan and Bradford were not great (we were awful, obviously) and the Wolfs were poor. Catalans were still in the initial building phase.

Compare that with 2012. If we are to win the SL we will have to get past Wire almost certainly. While I think we have the edge on them they have some exceptional players and are a very, very good side indeed. We may have beaten Catalans today but they are a strong side with a massive pack and some real quality in the backs too. Huddersfield are a very good outfit too, and they did a real number on us at the start of the season. Saints too are a good side, albeit I think if Brown were at TP already you would be a bigger threat than you are.

The environment was very different in 2006. Leaving aside the question of how good the Saints team of that era was I think we can safely say there are at least 4 teams in SL better than the second best team in 2006. 2006 was a bit like the centenary championship season in 1995 when Wigan won easily, but it seemed the other teams weren't even competing.

Bradford in 2003 had a monster pack. I still can't believe their winning margin in the GF was as low as it was because we were totally outmuscled and outclassed in the forwards in that game, despite having players like Craig Smith, Farrell, O'Connor and Newton in the pack. We are getting close to that level of power now, blowing teams away in the first 20, but for me that Bulls back of 2003 remains the benchmark.

That Bulls team was immense going forward but I was including defence within my assessments and as good as they were they were not the complete deal. We beat them comfortably during the season putting forty odd on them at our place and winning 0-35 at their's with what most fans would rate at one of the weakest Saints teams we've seen in Super League.

One of the reasons why I mentioned the '06 Saints was because their defence shifted into a gear which we'd not seen in Super League, destroying opposition teams without the ball as much as with it. I think it's a better comparison to what your pack is doing than that Bulls team which was strong but still carried weaknesses and I don't think you can say that about either of the other two. It's your defence which is proving the bigger factor in matches for me.