I’m just baffled what goes on in the week on the training field because we certainly don’t look to have an idea of what the attacking game plan is out on the field. It’s hard to even describe what it is that we’re producing with the ball. It’s just 80 minutes of nothingness. No off the cuff plays, no set moves, no offloading game, no power game, just nothing, literally nothing.

It’s a shame that such a great player for us will leave this club after his time coaching us and when people mention his name in years to come, it’ll send a shudder through me and I’ll think of him in negative terms but it’s been truly dreadful to watch us these last few seasons. We’re averaging 15 points a game this season and that’s less per game on average than Leigh (who average 16 points). In our last 9 games we’re averaging 10 points per game. It’s is just astonishingly poor and whilst we may have a few injuries to contend with, it’s just no excuse for numbers that low.

Is it, though? The laws of the game state: A player is guilty of misconduct if he, when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly.

I certainly don't think what Charnley did was intentional or reckless. Careless? I think you could argue that either way.

For what it's worth, I think it should have gone to the video ref, but I'm not sure how he would have ruled it.

I think Wigan play as though they have practised moves in training and usually move it well from wing to wing.
Warrington didn’t seem to have a move in them but their strong athletic players are good at offloading the ball which creates chances.
Wigan have only one player who can regularly offload and we all know who he is.
Off the cuff play often creates tries and we can’t do it.
I was pleased with the effort and the game was entertaining.
The one failing was the appalling decision of the referee which killed the game off for Wigan.

Hicks was right on top of the collision between Marshall and Charnley.
Up until the replay after Lam slated Hicks, I too thought it could have had a VT run, however Hicks who was closest and saw exactly what we all saw with the close up after the Lam interview, that he was 100% correct not to go to the screen.
The close up shown Marshall moving towards the centre field and into Charnley’s shin with his head and Charnley unable to get out of the way.
Also what the video didn’t show, was Marshall thumping the ground just after he lost the ball. That was only visible from the stands as it was off camera as Mamo sprints clear.
So the question is, if the ref is 100% sure with what he saw, (and the reply backs up that decision), why is it, we are getting calls for, ‘it should have gone to the screen!”?
It obviously shouldn’t because Hicks was 100% sure and 100% correct.

He had hold of the ball until he was kicked in the head you dumb f*ckwit!

Nope. He was acting. Marshall thumped the ground when he lost the ball, as
Mamo was away. The camera followed Mamo and Marshall ground thump wasn’t seen on tv. Unless there is a 4/5 second delay getting ‘clearly knocked out’!?

He’s not stupid. Marshall milked it, he was not knocked out, after he lost the ball and thumped the ground, he suddenly became prone.

It's a penalty even if he was acting. He only lost the ball through contact to the head. I can't imagine many watching the prone player In that situation and if he wasn't injured with the game still only at two scores then going off. Sounds like your talking which reading this site regularly is so very unusual .

And I thought that they had closed Winwick Hospital, how silly of me! If Marshall was acting then how did he fail an HIA? Obviously, there is some sort of conspiracy going on.

He needs to go, was sick of seeing his annoyed/baffled face on sky whenever things werent going well, like this isn’t down to his own terrible decisions and bad coaching.

The scoreline. It shows just how bad Wigan played that they couldn't even go into the break ahead...

Think you might want to brush up on the rules yourself there bud. Accidental things aren't penalties, they're accidents. I do think it should have gone to the video ref to check whether it was intentional/reckless though.

That's where the ref went wrong.

An awful lot of people on here are assuming it was an accident (presumably because the offender was Charnley, who usually doesn't know what's going on in front of his nose let alone has time to kick it).

That's a big assumption when something is happening at game-speed.

But it's often been the case that accidental collision with the head has resulted in penalties. Rightly or wrongly, we've all seen it and been infuriated by it dozens of times.

It was typical of Hicks, the most snivelling excuse for a referee we've got (out of a whole selection of them) to choose this occasion to do nothing at all.

I’d love to get worked up about the decision but it’s not the reason we lose the game and it’s an easy excuse for Lam to hide behind. He should be appalled at the attack we’re serving up and that’s on him. We have far bigger worries with Lam in charge than a player being accidentally caught on the head. The attack is that bad it felt like game over at 14-8 anyway, as I didn’t see where anymore points were coming from.

That was the actual reason I started this thread.

I agreed with him about Hicks' pathetic error, but for him to then say that Wigan were the better team was not just churlish, it made him look ridiculous.

If he genuinely can't see where Wigan are going wrong at present, then he can't be a coach. It's that simple.