Its been like this for ages. I brought it up in the off season and asked why not look back at some of the past moves of the 90s and fit them into the modern game when the time is right. I was shouted down, told that you can only play modern RL to set structure that must not be strayed from. Garbage i say, they are trying to over complicate a simple issue of confusing defenders because thats what it boils down to be in 1992 or 2020.

Apologies Rogues but grinding out wins with good defence isn't what Lam has promised for the last 15 months.
Also I think adjectives stronger than disappointing are also necessary. We've played one man rugby with incessant inside balls every game. Fans debate on which 2 to pick from Manfredi, Marshall and Burgess and I just smile. Marshall has had 2 passes in 2 games. Burgess a similar number. I'm not a statistician but I'd have a guess that our wingers scored fewer tries last year than in any year in at least the last decade.

I'm angry not disappointed that with a relatively healthy squad and with decent acquisitions of French and Hastings I'm watching a style of rugby that frankly is pretty dire.
I'm tired of hearing not disappointed that the coach once again can only blame the players after the Cas game with zero reference to his input to the game. He states "we didn't play to the plan", "our discipline was poor" which he can effect and if he were a coach be able to rectify quite easily.

I'm bored not disappointed of hearing "training went well". As a few have said since his tenure we have zero style or structure so I don't know what "training went well" means.

If we had lost 16-12 to say the 2017 Cas team last Friday I would have been disappointed but could have taken it on the chin but losing to a pretty much decimated 2019 Cas team with hardly a sniff of rugby or fight just drives me crazy.

Fixed that for ya

Watching the extended highlights on Wigan TV it doesn't look like our attack was lacking ideas, it looks like it was a case of poor execution in a close game, plus a little bit of bad luck at times. A couple of breaks that we made you would expect to lead to tries - such as the Burgess break where he flung the ball back inside over French's head. The Farrell break where he should have passed inside to Smith but threw it in touch behind Burgess. Smith's inside pass to French on the last and the kick through to Burgess was a well worked move.

I'm willing to wait a couple more games to see whether we see much improvement in attack. We always tend to come into the season with less game time under our belts than most teams and it can lead to a slow start.

I think our biggest issue compared to other teams is that most sides put on good attacking moves off the back of a dominant carry and quick play the ball. I'm not sure our forwards have been able to give us the best opportunity to do that so far. There are a few subtleties to making good carries and getting quick play the ball that I think come with experience. In form I think Flower and Bullock could add a lot to this side.

What did you think about the Bibby no try decision? I also want to see the obstruction calls, one of which I think would have led to a try. The first Havard penalty looked harsh and I think the Cas player was offside on the final play of the game (cherry and white specs on)

edit
I've just watched it again and Bibby definitely scores. Even if that's not given, the Cas player kicks the ball over the dead ball line and it's a goal line dropout, NOT a 20 metre tap which is what was given.

Not sure which penalty it was I'll have to watch again, but the crowd appeals with the usual "ooooo" shout and the ref responds but it's across the chest.

Funny how the Bibby No Try isn't included in the official Super League highlights reel...



Was the knock on that lead to the 2nd Cas Try the correct call? Looked like he hit the arm, not the ball from where we were standing.

So many tries in the modern game involve the full-back coming into the attacking line on one edge or the other. They are either directly involved in play by receiving the ball and creating an over-lap for the outside backs, or indirectly involved by creating indecision in the defensive line and creating space for others.

The disallowed try was right in front of us and for me it was a try. At one point I thought the TJ had indicated that it was a try.
We had other opportunities that we flunked miserably though

Never ceases to amaze me on RLfans, how many disallowed tries we’re “right in front of me”.

You've never fixed or been right about anything in your life.

Im not disputing that but who says all teams must stick to this kind of play? Why not mix it up so that the opposition have no idea what kind of play you are going to run next?