Re: Potter : Thu Oct 07, 2010 5:56 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

I know what you're saying but in fairness - we had more composure at the DW because Leon Pryce was playing and in red hot form.

We had plenty of composure against Warrington in the playoffs, enough to come back after two opening quick fire tries. Neither Pryce nor Eastmond were anywhere in sight during that match. Ditto for the match against Hudds, albeit that we struggled a bit more with that, and we lost Eastmond halfway through (not that he was ever really there to be honest).

We were also far less creaky in the centres because Flannery was there - big mistake from Potter the way he set up the left edge defence in the GF.

Our left edge defence was a problem against Wire, too, but it was fixed. We didn't have Gardner on there of course on Saturday night, but our former coach was a plank.

Re: Potter : Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:05 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Wigan lost at home to just about every meaningful team in SL for example. Leeds, Wire, Saints, Huddersfield and erm.... Harlequins. They were not the marauding avengers everyone makes them out to have been. Good team, good season.

But what people remember is that they really nailed the GF and that's what people are judging. They lost to Leeds a few weeks earlier in the play offs.

As you say, good team, good season, well coached in defence and attack, a visibly good spirit and commitment across the team. It ticks a lot of boxes and they managed to hold it together for the biggest game of the year.

We scraped our way through a lot of the season on our bare bones and limped to the GF, and many, me included, thought we didn't have a half bad chance of bringing it home.

Re: Potter : Thu Oct 07, 2010 7:16 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

No one said it had to be a good plan
Seriously though, even if we did have this elusive plan B, executing it on the field without your first choice halfbacks is another matter.

Did DA have a plan B? I especially remeber a couple of weeks against Hull FC when they proved otherwise...

I'd say his two GF defeats showed he didn't

Re: Potter : Thu Oct 07, 2010 7:21 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

Would Wigan have had a plan B had Tomkins and Tommy (Pryce and Eastmond) and Feka (Maurie) been injured for them and we had a fully fit team?

Put Roberts in there and even with those injuries I think they would, they've got enough speed to put a long kick and chase in for example, we didn't. We've looked like we've bulked up too much like we did in 2007 (or was it 08?) under Anderson and our slow backs are just slower.

We looked slow and lacked ideas with both our rapid creative half backs out. Funny that.

Reverse the circumstances and Saints would be champions and Wigan well beaten. That's RL I'm afraid.

You'll find no argument from me on that score. IMO, put Pryce and Eastmond into that team and whilst I'm not saying we would have won, we'd have been competing in those last 10 minutes.

Re: Potter : Thu Oct 07, 2010 7:30 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

We were also far less creaky in the centres because Flannery was there - big mistake from Potter the way he set up the left edge defence in the GF.

Didn't he move him over there after those disastrous first 20 mins?

IMO Lomax and his inexperience has a lot to do with it, along with Meli's defensive frailty. Lomax avoided almost all blame for the shambolic defence down his side at Salford, with Foster taking it all. I think he had something to do with that performance as well.

Re: Potter : Fri Oct 08, 2010 7:12 am  

Saint from Prestwich wrote:

This season I have seen some of the most boring rugby I can recall in all the years I have watched Saints.Take your style of play over the Pennines to Bradford Potter-I am sure they will appreciate you.I desparately hope Simmons does not follow the same mantra,He also needs to teach them how to tackle and goal line defence

You must not have been watching us last year then because even though 2010 wasn't exactly Saints of 1996/2000/2002 or 2006 we have been a whole lot better to watch than last year.

Last year we failed to break the 20 point barrier in the last 12 matches or something similar. This year we've been scoring for fun, although mostly close range.

2009 really was the year of 5 drives and a crap kick, even if we got that far. This year was a lot better.

There is no way that this year was worse than last for entertainment value.

Re: Potter : Fri Oct 08, 2010 4:00 pm  

I can see us revert back to a more expansive type game under RS. I certainly hope that is the case. The trouble is, with the exception of possibly Shenton, we dont have anyone in the outside backs who can score a try from 60-70m out.

Re: Potter : Fri Oct 08, 2010 7:29 pm  

The Chief wrote:

I can see us revert back to a more expansive type game under RS. I certainly hope that is the case. The trouble is, with the exception of possibly Shenton, we dont have anyone in the outside backs who can score a try from 60-70m out.

And that's the key point.

If we'd tried the expansive game with this side, we'd have struggled to pick up the wins as we simply don't have the players to take advantage of that system.

We're far better equipped to play a percentages game, put some pressure on the oppo line and strike from 10m out.

Potter simply played to our strengths, and got good results by doing so.

Re: Potter : Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:49 am  

The Chief wrote:

I can see us revert back to a more expansive type game under RS. I certainly hope that is the case. The trouble is, with the exception of possibly Shenton, we dont have anyone in the outside backs who can score a try from 60-70m out.

I was thinking about this and I do wonder. The problem is we never seem to see our backs out in the open. Foster (for example) seems to have good speed and a bit of pace - not perhaps enough to just out strip someone on the outside, but enough so that if he was on the break it would be hard to catch him. We just don't seem to see it very often.

Re: Potter : Mon Oct 11, 2010 2:36 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

I was thinking about this and I do wonder. The problem is we never seem to see our backs out in the open. Foster (for example) seems to have good speed and a bit of pace - not perhaps enough to just out strip someone on the outside, but enough so that if he was on the break it would be hard to catch him. We just don't seem to see it very often.

Because when we make a break, the other team always have 3 or 4 faster playes who are able to get back, and stop us finishing off the breaks. We do make breaks, but in the past we've always had the likes of Albert, Lyon, Long, Sullivan, Newlove etc. who would be flying in support, but now anyone near there speed.