Just one question YG: I know it's 4 points for a try and 2 for a conversion but remind me how many points you get for most territory as I can't find reference to it anywhere.

At magic, you played your way, we played ours. Until we went down to 12 men you never lead the contest. Were we the better team? Well we didn't play at our best so I'll say possibly not but don't point to the things you do better as if they're the only things that determine a game. We were beating you for the vast majority of that match and I'd argue would have won the match had we not gone down to 12. Opinion, I grant you, but the fact you never lead despite all the points you got for your massive territorial advantage (sic) suggests that it's at the very least a reasonable opinion.

Quote: LewCharnock "That's exactly what I am saying, Wigan were really poor, particularly in the first half. The amount of times they produced unforced errors and gave the initiative to Saints in the first half was astounding. But Saints ultimately did nothing with it. What I mean by looking the better team is when we got into your half, we looked dangerous every set whereas Saints didn't look like scoring. What I would ask you is, how do you think it would have gone had Wigan had the amount of territory and possession that Saints had? I personally think game over by half time. In big, one-off games territory and possession are usually split fairly even. I think myself and Wigan fans are optimistic that if we get a fair share of ball and complete sets in a big game, we have a great chance. PS, YG it would be great if you could point me in the direction of the game stats, would love to look at these..'" I answered this exact question the day after the game mate and said that had Wigan had the same possession and position we had, you would score more points. But my point is you didn't. https://www.superleague.co.uk/match-centre/report/3572

Quote: LewCharnock "That's exactly what I am saying, Wigan were really poor, particularly in the first half. The amount of times they produced unforced errors and gave the initiative to Saints in the first half was astounding. But Saints ultimately did nothing with it. What I mean by looking the better team is when we got into your half, we looked dangerous every set whereas Saints didn't look like scoring. What I would ask you is, how do you think it would have gone had Wigan had the amount of territory and possession that Saints had? I personally think game over by half time. In big, one-off games territory and possession are usually split fairly even. I think myself and Wigan fans are optimistic that if we get a fair share of ball and complete sets in a big game, we have a great chance. PS, YG it would be great if you could point me in the direction of the game stats, would love to look at these..'" I answered this exact question the day after the game mate and said that had Wigan had the same possession and position we had, you would score more points. But my point is you didn't. https://www.superleague.co.uk/match-centre/report/3572

No. You have had a better season so far. You haven't been the better team so far. There is a difference. But this is one of those that could drag on so we can agree to disagree on it.

I was directly answering someone who mentioned possession and territory and said they thought Wigan were on top. I didn't mention points, so your sarcastic question is a bit needless really mate. So is that really annoying thing you do of putting words in my mouth. I never claimed that possession and territory determine a game. I actually was very complimentary about wigan and said they can hurt you from anywhere and it's a battle of contrasting styles. I literally never claimed or even insinuated that possession and territory is the be all and end all. You talk about having grown up discussion so let's do that

I just hope that you give us a chance the next time we play. Given that you have dominated the last two games we have played, all the strike you have and now Cooper to add to the pack, I'm hoping we can at least give you a game and make the scoreline respectable.

I'm off to lump on Wigan winnning the Grand Final. Seems like its a licence to print money.

I'll tell you one thing. There is no way in the world that Wigan nil Hudds going down to 12 men after 16 mins, 11 for the last 8 mins and losing a FB after 3 mins. Absolutely no chance. However because its us, its simply because "Huddersfield were toothless". No other team in SL could've done that, not a chance.

We are having a better season so far but not the better team go figure,so yes we agree to disagree

But that is your opinion saying Wigan have no chance of emulating Saints against Hudds but we will never know.

Do you not even see the irony in this post Stu?

I have never said, insinuated or implied that. I was pointing out Wigan hadn't got on top in those areas which is what another posted had said.



I agree and have said the same myself in a complimentary fashion about Wigan.



I agree, hence why I haven't done that.



Literally me, all over this thread. I have said both teams have contrasting styles and when we meet again it could go either way.

I haven't said yardage and territory is the be all and end all, I haven't said it's the most important factor and I haven't said it makes us the better team. Literally read my posts this morning and after the Magic game and you will realise I have done none of the things you claim I have.

No not really. Go on educate me.

All I see is a complete and utter lack of respect for what we did last Friday. Even the neutral pundits were describing it as the performance of the season. French scores 7 and you beat Hull 60-0 and yet our performance is still being talked about more. Go figure.

Mate, we must be living in some sort of alternate reality. You literally posted:

"Quite shocked at this. I thought territorially we battered you personally and said this on here after the game. In terms of metres made on the day we were over 400m more than you for example (despite you scoring from two long range breaks from Field and french too). We also made more carries and you made more tackles. So in terms of both possession and territory we were on top. You were forever finishing sets in your own half. We were camped in your half for the start of the game but I don't recall us being under the pump on our line for long spells."

If that is not focussing on how territory isn't the defining factor as to why you were the best, I don't know what is.

That said if you don't believe that to be the case despite posting it then fair enough.