seemed like a strange decision to throw him in for such a big game after only 1 previous appearance (if that's the case).

to be fair to the lad he looked ok.... yes he dropped a kick... didn't do much else wrong though.

I disagree, Murphy's positioning at fullback is probably better than Richards. Murphy has always been a smart player in that respect.

He did what many fullbacks will do, struggle with well placed kicks by a player with one of the best kicking games in the whole of rugby league. I know Richards has a good reputation as having safe hands but he rarely if ever had to face kicks as difficult as that and under that sort of pressure. They just don't happen that frequently and you need the right combination of excellent kicker and inept pressuring from the defence simply to end up facing a kick like that. Richards has also dropped high bombs before, so it's no guarantee he would have been any better.

In all honesty I would of played Richards fullback but then again I don't blame murphy for not catching the bombs he's inexperienced and they were great kicks. You have to ask why was sinfield allowed to put such great kicks in and the answer is because we never attemped to pressure him even though it was clear he was Leeds main threat.

On another day, Murphy would have wriggled out of the tackle when he made a couple of half breaks right at the start of the game and gone the length of the field to score As it was a couple of very committed tacklers just managed to hold onto him - we would all have been saying what a brilliant brave decision by Wane.

Moving Pat to FB away from his best position on the wing would have been seen by many to be a backwards move, taking our best attacking winger away.

If we had played a little smarter and finished our sets of 6 at the leeds end with a grubber to pen then down their end or force a drop out, or put more pressure on sinfield then maybe Murphy wouldn't have been exposed at the end.

I tell you what Wane did with Murphy right there. He said, "Son, you're this clubs future, I rate you, and I want you involved" What Wigan got there was Murphy saying, "I love this club and it's my future" Wigan have a good young player there who will serve the club well. You might have lost last night but I bet you'll be singing about Murphy for years.

Let's not kid ourselves, had SW put Richards in at fullback he would have had to replace the wing spot with a lesser experienced player (Gelling..etc).

The instruction from Leeds would have been for Sinfield to bomb the $hit out of the winger.

Same result possibly. Great tactics and if only we employed similar (as Richards has arguably the bigger boot)!

Sorry, but what lost us the game was not kicking the penalty we had in their 20, points mean prizes, it wasn't a league game it was knock out rugby, we should have been taking any points we could have got our hands on, hope wane figures this out for next season, Murphy will probably learn more from this loss than he would have a win imo

Agreed!! Just hope he hasn't ruined a young lads career. Ridiculous decision!

The lad was struggling in the first half and seemed to have picked up an injury. Should have been changed at half time and put Richards there especially with the Leeds fans behind us.

Don't blame your young full back for dropping the bomb. Blame the player who gave us the penalty for offside.

Amos Roberts to full back?

I think anybody would have done what Farrell did 5 yards from the try line with Burrow running at you, to be honest Burrow ran straight for Farrell knowing he would be offside, again big players doing crucial things at the right time, Leeds did a lot of that last night and we didnt.

I was waiting for someone to bring this up, just cant believe it has taken until now!

I disagree. Had we done that we'd have knocked on from the kick off and they'd have scored anyway. You can't look at it and say we could have had 2 more points so we should have taken that option when the game from that point of would have panned out in a completely different way.

What lost us the game was having no composure whatsoever and being completely clueless at times, especially when leading with not much time left. The players didn't have a clue what they were supposed to do and messed it up.

Could not agree more, SW contradicts himself in team selections.

SO is not a 9 nor is he a 6 yet SW played him a 9, when TL was injured SO played at 6, he was average at best. Last night again he was played at 9 with Farrel at 13. It takes something away from the strucutre of the team, you could tell when the ball was moved wide it didn't look slick at all and missed SO as a link out wide.

The main issue here is he is playing SO a 9 because MM is suspended hence shuffling the team around, yet when Tomkins was injured he chose to pick Murphy from the U20's at full back and promote from within...he has played one SL game against Bradford to mind - terrible decision on reflection.

Personally I think Pat at Full Back and Thornley on the wing with either Smith or TL at 9 in a game of this magnitude woud have been better. If your going to 'shuffle' the team around then do it and be committed or if his philosphy is 'youth driven' then bring Logan Tomkins in as a specialist Hooker on the bench.

I just think he contradicts himself with his coaching philosophy and tends to go through spells having bringing youth in and then you dont see them for a few games i.e. Crosby, Spencer, L Tomkins.

Either way Murphy dropped a vital bomb from which the winning penalty resulted, I hope this helps Murphy and his development rather than hinders his confidence.