I don't think Celtic are getting as many compliments as they deserve. I thought they did the basics very well and completed their sets by finishing them off with a good, deep kick that usually kept Richards pegged back in his own ten or twenty. In defence, they slowed the play the ball effectively and really pressured us into situtions where we'd be too flat in attack and Tim Smith in particular seemed caught in two minds on occasions.

With regards to us, there were points when there was a complete lack of structure when we should have been playing smart, and then there were times when when we'd built up momentum and have good attacking opportunities but would revert to simple five drives and kick. I thought we made some very poor missed tackles, probably the most in any game all season, the Tim Smith/Amos Roberts attempt in the first half was probably the worst example and that lead directly to a try.

Our main playmaker yesterday was Mark Riddell and I thought he played very well. He ran from dummyhalf frequently and seemed relatively dangerous all game, making a few breaks & halfbreaks but let himself down when that kick went out on the full in the second half. Again, another player that let himself down with another costly mistake was Feka when he knocked on in our own ten. Until then, he was playing well making lots of yards in the process and I've seen a thread on here in regards to him which I think is a knee-jerk reaction. I was happy with Gleesons performance and his footwork is very good, but the only link up with Roberts seems to be the inside ball. I'd like to see Roberts hug the wing more and Gleeson try to suck in the winger. As regards the fullback position position, I thought we seemed much more dangerous in attack when Phelps switched there. He seems to link up better than Pat and has a good pair of hands that on one occasion set up an Ainscough break after cutting a couple of players out. Although Richards returned the ball ok, I prefer him outwide. I felt a little sorry for Ainscough and it seemed to be another case of one extreme to the other which unfortunately lead to him being subbed. He threw out a couple of crazy balls on the kick return, one that left us with little space and we ended up in touch and the other being passed straight into touch. When he did return the ball correctly, he looked fast and was hovering across the defence looking for a gap to jink through Robinson-style. He was dangerous, but lacked composure. I'm sure he'll learn.

I thought Stuart Fielden was bullied throughout the game. He was smashed from all directions and I think the only way he'll improve significantly is if he piles some weight on. Other mentions...Flanagan did well when he came on, particulary in defence but I would have liked to see him with the ball in hand a bit more. Tommy seemed quite dangerous in parts especially backing up the ball carrier, I think he's made for hooker.

All in all, we didn't play very well but we weren't dreadful. Celtic just handled us well, played the basics and striked at the right times. We didn't have the composure or correct tactics to control the game.

Most teams just seem to need to do the basics right to beat us. I wasn't there but how were we notdreadful to lose to a team with one win this season who were themselves missing several first team players? That seems a complete contradiction and reading the rest of your post it does in fact read as we were pretty dreadful with at the very least a very high error rate and some poor tackling.

Dave

Basic play is something even an amateur should take for granted, for me any professional team should never be lacking in basic play, let alone lose a game because of it

The scenario was dreadful but not the performance. We were fustrated in attack after being legally slowed down at the play the ball. We did play with structure but at the wrong times of the game and we often peppered Celtics line but struggled to get it. We were missing two of our most influential players too. I didn't think the error rate was too high, they were just made just at crucial times of the game in crucial areas of the field.

We played poor and I'm not happy with the performance, but it wasn't dreadful and there is a lot of over reation going on because of the opposition's league position and not what actually went on the pitch.

We should be putting a team, with 1 win (at that point) out of 15 games, away with relative ease with or without Hock and Lockers. We've got a squad of what I thought were decent players. The fact that those 2 are missing shouldn't matter against a team like Celtic.

We should be giving Wakefield a game with those 2 missing.

Their league position is a very valuable point in this. They are bottom of the league for 1 reason and 1 reason only. They're crap! They've got the worst points for and the worst points against. They've won 1 game and, up until yesterday, were 8 points adrift at the bottom. If we were 2/3/4 games into the season then we could say that league positions are irrelevant, but we're 16 games in and at this point a teams position in the league tells us all we need to know particularly when they're adrift at the foot of the table.

I wasn't there yesterday but I didn't need to be to make up my mind about how good we were. The sooner something happens with this team, whether that's players dropped or people ousted, the better for me.

To be honest yesterday's result did not suprise me in the slightest, I mean we were very fortunate to beat part time Barrow in the cup.

Half decent team being coached to death.

What I'm trying to address is that we weren't dropping a ball or giving away penalties every set. We found it hard to break the Celtic line because of their good defence and tactics. We couldn't make yards because they held us down to the very last millisecond before it was deemed as a penalty and they put heavy pressure on our halfbacks.

One of their tries was superb. Van Dijk chipped over and they regathered the ball but we managed to chase back. Taking advantage of the stretched defence they pinpointed a cross field kick to the opposite wing and scored in a shed load of space. Very few teams would have stopped a play like that.

Like I say, the few mistakes we did make (Riddell's kick, Roberts/Smith missed tackle, Fekas drop ball) were capitalised on.

I wasn't at the game so thanks for the report. Reading between the lines (from your report and other post-match comments), it sounds like the type of performance, which sadly characterises our team at present. Regardless of the high number of basic errors and poor attitude to these types of fixtures (against so-called inferior opposition), there are the usual problems of making poor field position. The long kicking game kills us because our pack struggle to make yards from their own half. Plus, we aren't creative or composed enough to break down a structured defence.

We were lucky to be only 6 points behind at half time (though I did think Ainscough's effort was a try [hard to judge from 50 yards away]) with the deflection for Hansen's try. Phelps always looked dangerous and got us back in the game with his try and his pass to Gleeson who put Roberts away. His link-up play is superb. Will definately get a contract next year and the number 1 shirt.

The more I watch Wigan the more frustrated I get with the way we play. On Saturday the players seemed content with just running the ball up and making metres. There were a couple of times when Coley or Feka would take the ball up the middle, make yards, offload and then from the offload we would just take the ball up the middle again, only making a few more metres.

Now I'm no expert on RL, but why cant the players once in a while from an offload, when they see the defence is stretched, throw the ball out wide, keeping it alive (ala Saints) and use our centres and wingers which is one of our strongest positions. I dont know if we didn't do this as much because we were missing Hock, but we just seemed to settle for the simple stuff.

Other things that annoyed me were, kicking on the 3rd tackle (Riddell did this a couple of times) and not going for a short kick off, after their winning try.

I would much rather see entertaining rugby, if it means we make a few mistakes, rather than conservative boring rugby where we are scared to show a bit of flair.

Just about spot on! But it won't stop the usual picking out Riddell/Roberts & Bailey!

Having re-read that it probably dont make sense, but I knew what I meant

But given their record so far either they never played like that before or we are not as good as other sides who have played them who can get past their tactics and defence.

It's one or the other and given our record this season I don't think it takes a genius to work out which one I reckon it is.

Dave

I scrolled up from the last post to this one and I didn't need to get to the top where I could see the user name to guess who posted it!

I have red several different opinions on the game and based on those Roberts was poor and for the 2nd week running was directly responsible for a try against us. Opinions on Riddell are at best divided (one good run was what I read elsewhere).

Doesn't matter because it isn't just one game is it? Time to realise some of our players are failing to deliver.

Dave

Celtic's home record before last night:

P6 W0 L6 D0 F84 A186 +/-(102) PTS0