No I wouldn't actually. As when a poor team plays a poor team the contest will be more even, hence a less high scoring game.

Wigan's tactics are clearly good enough to beat the majority of teams, but not to beat the best.

Well as this thread is about your view, as you opened the thread, its only fair that we hear them. And i asked you to clarify them, which you did, eventually.

Our problem has not been the structures but the application which has gone to pot since TL has been injured. Its one thing wanting to have plays like team "a" and other plays like team "b", but we have to play with what we have. TL's absence has also seen the threat of Finch lessen, and Pat's absence has reduced attacking threat, and % of tries converted, and, i believe, affected Charnleys confidence. The plays were working well before TL was injured, just look at tries scored. If they are working fluidly we will score from them. In the major games we have lost the problem has not been the backs, its been in the forwards. To use a football analogy, everybody knew that Beckham could kick a dead ball, and get a half a yard to get a cross in, players knew, but could not stop it.

If you open a thread with the line "I expect a bashing" then expect one. Other people have opinions too, as equally valid and invalid as yours. Have a lovely evening.

The other glaring problem is our lack of a kicking game .We saw glimpses last night in the 2nd half when Finch was putting the kicks to the left hand corner,that was working turning stains around giving our forward a liitle respite but after 4 successive kicks it disappeared. We dont have a Sinfield or Briers even a Wilkin ,whose kicks can keep turning a team around throughout the match as our kicking game this season has been pants.

Wilkin? Did you watch the game last night?

But the point is, surely if some of the opposition is poor, as you say, you would expect a team like Warrington or Saints to rack up similar scores than us?

And the only team we have not beaten all year is Warrington, once when we beat ourselves due to poor discipline, and once because Wire played like it was their GF and subsequently lost the following week to one of the bottom 2 sides.

Or are you saying that every team apart from us is poor, at which point your argument about our attack becomes invalid, as we're the runaway best team in the comp?

Our attack isn't perfect, and has become disjointed with the injury to Tommy, who was one of our major pivots for most of the season. The attack is not broken, and to try and go with a completely different style of attack, than the one that has worked all year, so close to the end of the year, would be one big risk to take.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

So how about the cumulative points that we've scored against the supposed good sides in the table?

Saints - 88
Leeds - 70 (including a 50 point haul away from home with a 2nd string)
Catalans - 72
Hudds - 48 (including hammering the then league leaders away from home with no pack)

We lost by penalty kicks to Wire the first time, and lost the forward battle the second. We could have had 256789875787 moves that day and would have still lost because the ball was so slow as Wire marshalled us well. It happens. We've done it to sides several times.

If we had lost to HKR then we would have played a full strength side last night and imho won the game. We very nearly won it with 12 men for over an hour. The killer tries came off the back of a lucky bounce and a 5th tackle penalty giving them another 6 on our line with an extra man.


I've said for a while that I think Wire will win the GF, but should we play them and our pack get on top then they'll struggle to defend against our supposed one move just like everyone else. We get a quick PTB and the defence struggles to set in time leaving a gap somewhere be it where Finch can put Hock through, Sam can chime through, or Sam can put the winger or centre away. Don't panic.

I haven't read the whole thread as I got bored but most teams have one set planned move and variations of that. Saints when Long was there only had one move, but the dummy runners would sometimes get it also if defneders overread it the ball came out the back. It is the variations on the play that needs to be worked on.

You have put it in a nutshell....

I wouldn't even say the variations need working on. There are 4 possible variations of that set up.

1 - Finch puts SR through gap.
2 - Sam comes through and does what Sam does best.
3 - Sam puts centre away.
4 - Sam puts winger away having missed out centre.

We have scored tries from all 4 of those plays this season. The problem is that if the forwards don't get a quick PTB (which they didn't against Wire) then it won't work, but that is true of most teams key moves.

This.

It isn't the structures but the application. The amount of variation that can be applied is huge. If anyone has played the game to a decent standard and has come up against a team who can pull this sort of structure off efficiently it is virtually unstoppable. The amount of confusion the possible variation causes means even the very best teams have to hang back in defence. There isn't any need to have a book of 'set moves' because having one structure from which the halves/Sam can choose to play however they like is much more effective, when it is applied correctly.

I think the whole issue revolves around not having Tommy within that structure when he was injured.

I agree with much that has been said, for me it’s not overly complicated why we’ve had a bad drop in form, the loss of Tommy yes, but I’m not a big advocate of the one man makes a team brigade. no I think the main problem is not so much the backs, nor plan A, B or Z, I may be being over simplistic but I like simplicity in RL, for me the main reason is that the forwards have not been anywhere near as effective in the last couple of months. The platform for the backs to do their stuff has diminished; and the go forward is not as aggressive or as dominant as it was. Without a very good pack performance no matter how good the rest, you can forget it! The lack of good field position, and ok the weak kicking game from the backs doesn’t help that, but I still maintain that 80% of the problem, IMO is in the forwards.

If you look most of the top sides in SL use the same set moves, the reason they work for the top sides and therefore the reason they are at the top of the league is because they execute them better than most other teams. Also as has been pointed the 'one' set move we have does not have just one outcome there are at least 5 potential plays that can be made when using the move depending on how defenders react to it

Spot on.

Our backs are good but they like any set will struggle to perform if the forward pack doesn't get on top. About 2-3 months back Lima, Mossop, Dudson, Hansen, McIlorum etc were ripping teams to shreds and the backs could have played in dinner suits but a lot of those guys I mention have lost form or in Dudsons case been injured and the whole side lost it's momentum.

On the plus side I thought we saw the fire come back in the majority of the packs bellies on Friday and we need to carry that on now. I'm confident we can get on top of any pack when we really want it.

Do that and these backs can cut any team up.

The title of this thread is in itself a joke, given that a lot of people had written Waney off after round one and predicted us to finish lower than last year.