Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:17 pm  

Outstanding effort by the lads today. Outplayed Wigan for fifty minutes of the eighty (they were strong ten minutes before half time and twenty minutes after) and only conceded through inexperience.

I can understand Graham's frustration. We gave Wigan three gilt-edged chances with eight minutes to go. Lomax's kicking the ball to their most elusive player on the last tackle and in their ten metre zone. Then Shenton failing to secure the ball with three minutes left and six tackles to play. Then Foster's poor drop-out which resulted in Wigan starting on our forty.

In many ways it's one of those paradoxical games that you need to experience fully before you can win. Lomax, Foster and Shenton might well be able to get away with such sloppy play in the reserves (or Cas), but you can't afford the same if you want to play with the big boys.

Yes, injuries (and a woeful forward pass) went against us. I wasn't too worried about Wellens because I thought he was having a stinker anyway and looked old. But losing Wheeler was tragic as it allowed the Wigan defence to concentrate solely on Lomax, instead of having a dual axis to worry about. And there was the complete lack of forward power when Graham and Puletua went off. I doubt if we made more than thirty five yards per set of carries in that first twenty. When both players returned we immediately started to make ground.

The above said, pretty much everyone played well - except Gardner (who looked hopeless and was totally outplayed by Foster). Meli wasn't too hot either and gave away too many penalties.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:24 pm  

I'm not sure Graham was giving them a bollocking, actually. Not from what I read on his lips.

We bombed two try scoring opportunities under the sticks as well, which would have won the game. As it is, that first try for Wigan which was on the back of a forward pass, counted. How important such calls are and how ludicrous the forward passes have become.

Aside from the sheer effort of will shown by our lads when their backs were to the wall, all I can really take from that game is that they could only beat us with a forward pass try and with half a team made up of kids.

Damn, damn shame about Wheeler. He was outstanding. What is it about those Melbourne players? Do they have to injure someone to feel like a bloke or something? Really piddled me off, that did.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:26 pm  

I agree with your sentiment - we gifted it to them in the last 10 mins but I disagree about Wellens. His experience and defensive organising abilities were sorely missed and I really believe had he been on the field at the end we wouldn't have lost. Lomax made a mistake kicking to Tomkins but he had a fine game and as you say, just needed Wheeler with him for the second half to shoulder some responsibility.

A great effort, but we will struggle on Monday now.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:29 pm  

Oh he was giving them a bollocking all right. There might have been a few rallying cries thrown in for good measure. But let's not kid ourselves and think he was going softly softly.

I hope he also threw in a rocket for Foster's try scoring action which will cost us big-time at some point.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:31 pm  

MickeyMo wrote:

I agree with your sentiment - we gifted it to them in the last 10 mins but I disagree about Wellens. His experience and defensive organising abilities were sorely missed and I really believe had he been on the field at the end we wouldn't have lost.

Had Makinson been on the field instead of Wellens from the start we'd be six points further up, too. And we'd have started fifteen yards further up the pitch on each set of six.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:33 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Had Makinson been on the field instead of Wellens from the start we'd be six points further up, too. And we'd have started fifteen yards further up the pitch on each set of six.

Touche

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:56 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Oh he was giving them a bollocking all right. There might have been a few rallying cries thrown in for good measure. But let's not kid ourselves and think he was going softly softly.

I hope he also threw in a rocket for Foster's try scoring action which will cost us big-time at some point.

Guess we will find out on Monday

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:00 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

I hope he also threw in a rocket for Foster's try scoring action which will cost us big-time at some point.

Sorry, I don't understand this?

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:05 pm  

I thought jammer was giving a we are just as good as anyone speech.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:15 pm  

St pete wrote:

I thought jammer was giving a we are just as good as anyone speech.

Just watching in on Sky too. Jamie Foster says Jammer told them they will all remember today when the play offs come around. More of a 'well do em' speach than a telling off.

If we ever take the field against those Goons with a full strength lineup we would murder them.