: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:25 pm  

Mighty Wires wrote:

It could of been a hell of alot worse, considering that we only really had one pre-season friendly before the match.

wigan,hullkr,swinton..............i make that three.

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:04 pm  

Bobby_Peru wrote:

Overall I came away from the game with a 'glass half full' optimism.

Obviously their are many factors that need to polished/rectified (all of which have already been discussed at length on this board).

IMO we were still right in the game until that berk of referee gave the knock-on against Briers when he was CLEARLY not playing at the ball with his leading arm and was concentrating on the tackle.
If this 'penalty' hadn't been given the resulting play would have had us in excellent ball position on the half way line.

Yes I know anything could have happened after this,(probably a knock-on at the first play the ball knowing Wires) but after this penalty was awarded the wheels came off big time!

Just my 2 penneth'

Totaly agree. Good post fella.

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:22 pm  

I think the most depressing thing about Friday night, was that at 14-0 I reckon most Wire fans were still waiting for the sting in the tail, and as if by a pre-ordained appointment, along it came!!...

Personally, looking back, it was obvious that Lowes sent the team out with a plan, and that was to simply bore Saints (and most spectators) to death, and steal a win.

Fair enough, nothing wrong with that, only our fitness levels were obviously very poor, and we simply ran out of gas with a quarter of the game to go.

What was a bit worrying was that there seemed to be no Plan B once Saints overcome the Plan A.....There was no attacking flair, which has probably a lot to do with the fact they were out on their feet, but also must have been a bit to do with the fact our half backs were virtually in their shells for the whole game....Suddenly being asked to spark when the poop has hit the fan is harder to do than it seems.

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:49 pm  

Lefty wrote:

Hooray. I agree. Gutted at first but in the cold light of day we were very good indeed.

Whilst I agree that some of us have gone over the top and been pretty negative, I don't think, in any game where you lose by 6 tries to 2, you can be described as 'very good indeed'.

Had Long got all his kicks, like Hicks did, the score would have been 36 to 14. That score would have been a fair reflection IMO.

: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:10 pm  

Dave T wrote:

Whilst I agree that some of us have gone over the top and been pretty negative, I don't think, in any game where you lose by 6 tries to 2, you can be described as 'very good indeed'.

Had Long got all his kicks, like Hicks did, the score would have been 36 to 14. That score would have been a fair reflection IMO.

If if if if if. OK We were excellent in the first 55/60 mins. Then we were the victim of our errors and indiscipline. However I was overall pleased with the way we played for game 1.

: Tue Feb 17, 2009 3:14 pm  

just had a quick check, rileys stats at least as good as wellens if not slightly better, not bad for 1st run out at fb against the mighty sts

: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:59 pm  

Lefty wrote:

If if if if if. 1.

Not really if's are they. A true reflection of the game is seen in us outscoring you by 6 tries to 2. You can try to get some shred of comfort that the overall scoreline was closer but the fact is over the whole game we were a fair bit better.

: Tue Feb 17, 2009 11:09 pm  

Lefty wrote:

If if if if if. OK We were excellent in the first 55/60 mins. Then we were the victim of our errors and indiscipline. However I was overall pleased with the way we played for game 1.

I thought we showed a lot of positives for the first 50, but there were still plenty of weaknesses during that period. Our attack was still very conservative, and our defence looked very shaky when put under pressure. Fortunately, Saints attack also looked shaky. The dominance during the first 50 really should have seen the game killed. Saints were dominant for half an hour and got 6 tries in that period. That is the level we should be aiming for, not being happy that we got within 4 tries of them.

There undoubtedly were positives to be taken, but I just can't accept that we were very good or excellent for large parts of this game.

Re: Didn't really think it was that bad ! : Tue Feb 17, 2009 11:30 pm  

Steve51 wrote:

I genuinely expected us to get spanked on Friday from start to finish. Saints still smarting from the GF with a point to prove & the new coach wanting to make a statement.

For us to hold them scoreless for 50 minutes doesn't happen often and in the first half we looked the business. However there was that feeling everytime they got in our 20 that we looked likely to let them in.

Big plus points were Higham, and Carvell was immense going forward. Finally we looked good from marker.

I said before the game that Jimmy's making was the selection of Riley at fullback. And it was. The lad was outstanding. The only problem is his lack of size in backing up. But his pass to Rau for the try was inspired. Dopeed the ball over the line yes, but amunite earlier got a nasy bang to his ribs & looked hurt for the rest of the game. He dropped the ball getting whacked in the mid section again.

Saints first try - Gilmour turned Johnson inside out & left him for dead. Jimmy brought on Bridge for him & the problem went away.

That last 20 minutes when Saints starved us of the ball, no team could live with that pace & skill. We couldn;t deal with the big nr 16, and when Pryce was turning in the tackle we were stuffed.

None of the defeat should be laid on Lowes shoulders to be fair. Westood, Carvell & Morley gave daft penalties away in stupid positions. These put pressure on us where the line broke. Penny has a lot to learn.The "Foot in touch" try from the first half, King had to vitually shove Penny into position to defend. When Gleeson's fit drop him & put Johnson on the wing. And I still stand by my comment that Matt King can't tackle 1:1.

My only problem was with Briers. The best example was the Gidley try where for some reason Brieres was defending 3rd man in on the left. He stopped defending & started gobbing off to the ref about a forward pass. The ball came back from the wing & they scored in the gap he was defending. Shocking. Briers you ain't captain, keep it shut & do your job.

Very Accurate Post - My onely real criticisms are Penny's defensive positioning and King's lack of assistance despite being an "international class" centre.

Yet to add to Steve51's points, after watching the game again, In the 1st Half our kicking game was very solid yet the last 30 minutes our kicking did nothing to gain field position, often gifting Wellens a free run. You don't often notice the importance of general play kicking but it seemed to spring out on Friday.

Re: Didn't really think it was that bad ! : Wed Feb 18, 2009 1:54 am  

FuturoChampioni wrote:

Very Accurate Post - My onely real criticisms are Penny's defensive positioning and King's lack of assistance despite being an "international class" centre.

this is for Gardners Real try....not the "foot in touch try" I appreciate praising Penny for being in a position to force Gardner to put a foot in touch isnt the done thing but kin ell awarding a "try" that wasnt just because its on Pennys wing is nuts....

anyway back on defence.....when this happens for Gardners actual try Where would people like Kevin Penny to be.....??