10 points from first nine matches : Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:16 pm  

We did that in 2003 as well. The only other time we've had such a "good" start was 1999 when we won 7 from the first 9!!

: Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:23 pm  

I don't buy into this looking at the table in Rds 8, 16, 24 like Clarke and the SKY have you believe. There's too many variables, like the injuries we've had.

All told, i'm quite pleased really, at the same time there's no doubting we should be on 14 pts with the Wakefield and Huddersfield losses, some errors, plays, decisions [from players] etc cost us at valuable times.

All in all, we'll judge them after 27 Rds and hopefully a play off campaign and decide what we think of the season.

If that's the case, and history says this is a decent start for us then cool and that'll please 'the positives' on here, but the negatives will fire holes through it from all angles, stats lie.

: Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:54 pm  

The main thing i'm looking at is that even with the injuries we have we are still only 2 points behind the teams at the top.

: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:10 pm  

john_wilshires_physio wrote:

All told, i'm quite pleased really, at the same time there's no doubting we should be on 14 pts with the Wakefield and Huddersfield losses, some errors, plays, decisions [from players] etc cost us at valuable times.

That kind of puts things into context. Had we have been luckier with all the injuries (ie - not had them), I think there is a very good chance that we would have won those two games. Things would look so much different if we were two points clear at the top of the league!

'IF', the biggest word in the english language!

: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:27 pm  

does this mean that when the players come back from injury we expect to overhaul teams at the top of the table? remember that this big injury crisis has only really affected the last 2 games (fair enough Morley been out most of the season) if you look on the stats part of rlfans: http://www.slstats.org/t6/Warrington%20 ... ayers.html Reardon, Fa'afili, Clarke, Rauhihi and Wainwright have been ever presents - 9 games Martin Gleeson, Grose, Anderson, Mark Gleeson have played 8 games Johnson, Briers, Leikvoll, Westwood, Parker, Wood and Sullivan played 7 games so thats 16 players who have been pretty constant through all the season, it doesn't sound to me like a season long injury crisis! we have had injuries but Morley apart they have been concentrated around these last 2 weeks, when we have won one, lost one, and even there that has been a good opportunity for us to promote our England standard Academy players.

does this mean that when the players come back from injury we expect to overhaul teams at the top of the table? remember that this big injury crisis has only really affected the last 2 games (fair enough Morley been out most of the season) if you look on the stats part of rlfans: http://www.slstats.org/t6/Warrington%20 ... ayers.html Reardon, Fa'afili, Clarke, Rauhihi and Wainwright have been ever presents - 9 games Martin Gleeson, Grose, Anderson, Mark Gleeson have played 8 games Johnson, Briers, Leikvoll, Westwood, Parker, Wood and Sullivan played 7 games so thats 16 players who have been pretty constant through all the season, it doesn't sound to me like a season long injury crisis! we have had injuries but Morley apart they have been concentrated around these last 2 weeks, when we have won one, lost one, and even there that has been a good opportunity for us to promote our England standard Academy players.

: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:37 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote: does this mean that when the players come back from injury we expect to overhaul teams at the top of the table? remember that this big injury crisis has only really affected the last 2 games (fair enough Morley been out most of the season) if you look on the stats part of rlfans: http://www.slstats.org/t6/Warrington%20 ... ayers.html Reardon, Fa'afili, Clarke, Rauhihi and Wainwright have been ever presents - 9 games Martin Gleeson, Grose, Anderson, Mark Gleeson have played 8 games Johnson, Briers, Leikvoll, Westwood, Parker, Wood and Sullivan played 7 games so thats 16 players who have been pretty constant through all the season, it doesn't sound to me like a season long injury crisis! we have had injuries but Morley apart they have been concentrated around these last 2 weeks, when we have won one, lost one, and even there that has been a good opportunity for us to promote our England standard Academy players. No, it means that had we have had a full squad for both of those two games (sHudders in particular) we would possibley, maybe even probably, have won them both. We would now be top as much because of other teams slip-ups rather than our own results, but we would still be top.

sally cinnamon wrote: does this mean that when the players come back from injury we expect to overhaul teams at the top of the table? remember that this big injury crisis has only really affected the last 2 games (fair enough Morley been out most of the season) if you look on the stats part of rlfans: http://www.slstats.org/t6/Warrington%20 ... ayers.html Reardon, Fa'afili, Clarke, Rauhihi and Wainwright have been ever presents - 9 games Martin Gleeson, Grose, Anderson, Mark Gleeson have played 8 games Johnson, Briers, Leikvoll, Westwood, Parker, Wood and Sullivan played 7 games so thats 16 players who have been pretty constant through all the season, it doesn't sound to me like a season long injury crisis! we have had injuries but Morley apart they have been concentrated around these last 2 weeks, when we have won one, lost one, and even there that has been a good opportunity for us to promote our England standard Academy players. No, it means that had we have had a full squad for both of those two games (sHudders in particular) we would possibley, maybe even probably, have won them both. We would now be top as much because of other teams slip-ups rather than our own results, but we would still be top.

: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:47 pm  

Realistically, we should have beat Wakefield and Huddersfield. The games were there for the taking but we didn't.

Debatable about Bradford, they came out in the second half and quite simply, we couldn't live with them.

PS

We are unfortunate that we are suffering in the main, injuries in the same position. The one player we struggle to replace is Briers.

: Wed Apr 15, 2009 11:31 am  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

The one player we struggle to replace is Briers.