It was a soft try to concede, end of. I am not blaming one player but our goal line defence has been pants for a while. KC does this thing weekly. It's a tactic and almost blindingly obvious. The fact we conceded a try to it says more about the teams general defensive frailties close to the line than it does any one player. It is just one issue that needs sorting out for Wigan to move up a level. It is not only KC who can score tries like that against us.

Dave

Still better positioning that for the one Fielden let in the other week! At least we got somewhere near KC

Agreed. Neither though is it a stick to beat O'Loughlin with on tonight's performance. As for him being 'owned' by KC on the back of that one lapse (equally shared with Bailey btw)... that's a joke. O'Loghlin had KC, Wellens and half the Saints team in his pocket defensively today. One defensive lapse doesn't negate this. I'm not disagreeing with your post incidentally as I called it as a soft try at the match but having seen the replay, equal credit needs to go to KC.

I think the words 'awesome' and brilliant are banded round far too easily. Lockers was good, thats actuate, nothing more.

For me at loose he's playing out of position looks far more threatening when running down the line linking up with Gleeson then roberts, not floating around the middle of the field.

Ainscough, Carmont, Hock-on one side
Roberts Gleeson Lockers on the other. Looks good to me.

Remember how well J Tomkins played at 10 when Lockers was injured? Get Joel at 13. Teams finally beginning to take shape.

All the players involved were at fault for that try and I agree it is not a stick to beat up Lockers with.



As I said he does it (or try's it) every week. Equally lesser players can score that way against us. We need to work out how to defend against it.

Dave

It's all relative compared to what has gone before

Sooner have Bailey and Tomkins over Hansen, bot can tackle up well and offer far more in attack.

Plus Tomkins would be a 13 with Lockers as 12. far better balance.

Leave Hansen out, see if he's missed.

Hansen, Hock and Lockers at second row and Tomkins at 13 for me. Hansen has a very important role in defence and though being unspectacular in attack he tends not to make too many silly errors.

Leave out last seasons SL Top Tackler and see if he is missed?

With Lockers at 12 and Tomkins at 13 I think Hansen is the ideal sub for Hock when it is time to defend.

I like Bailey as a player as well. I think he is underrated by many but if balance is what we want I think Hansen is the ideal sub for Hock given both J T and S O can do 80 mins.

Dave.

I simply said leave him out of the squad for the game and see if he's missed in any department.

I'm better no. His tackling helps hide his lack of skills in other departments.

Do you ever see him linking up with the centres then wingers? ever making a break? ever looking like trouble for the def?

Not making too many silly mistakes doesn't justify his place it the team. I'm trying to build a GF winning team.

I know what you mean but too many silly mistakes is imo [ione of[/i the main reasons we will never be a GF winning team. As DaveO says he is one of our hardest working players in defence and I think he will be missed if we drop him. I don't particularly think Bailey stands out in attack to be fair and if you look at clean breaks for last season as an example (since Bails has played at centre most of this year) Bailey didn't make any.

I've had a look at the replay now.

Lockers WAS at fault imo. He was the Primary marker and should have driven KC back instead of trying to tie him up.


Would KC have scored that try vs the Aussies? Not a chance. He has proven this inability on many occasions.


That said, as per my original post, I thought Lockers had one of his best games for us.