Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Tue Aug 27, 2024 8:33 pm  

Whilst we aren't going to have as quick a backline as yourselves and some others, I think we are definitely making improvements on it. Having Welsby, Robertson and Sailor knocking around is much pacier than Welsby, Hurrell and Dodd as a unit. Murphy is fast (if that rumour is true) and whilst not as fast as Ritson, Ritson has been cabbage and barely used his pace at all and doesn't seem capable of using it effectively in a game, so still a big upgrade. I'm not too bothered about having the fastest backline, there's so many other things to be considered. It just becomes a problem if your backline is actively slow af, which it has been this year and last. You'd like to think we'd be going for another centre as well which will then have Robertson filling in all around the backline rather than being first choice in any position. As long as we don't retain Blake, I think it will be a pretty big improvement on the back line we currently have which I'm fairly happy with

Now, how these quicker lads will fare being told to run straight into forwards that are twice their side every tackle, I don't know!

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Tue Aug 27, 2024 9:45 pm  

Stu M wrote:

Makinson ban reduced from 3 to 2.

At least we can get to see him in one last home game

Good. There’s a reason he got a two game ban and Asiata one, both will miss matches against Warrington

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Tue Aug 27, 2024 9:47 pm  

The Reaper wrote:

Whilst we aren't going to have as quick a backline as yourselves and some others, I think we are definitely making improvements on it. Having Welsby, Robertson and Sailor knocking around is much pacier than Welsby, Hurrell and Dodd as a unit. Murphy is fast (if that rumour is true) and whilst not as fast as Ritson, Ritson has been cabbage and barely used his pace at all and doesn't seem capable of using it effectively in a game, so still a big upgrade. I'm not too bothered about having the fastest backline, there's so many other things to be considered. It just becomes a problem if your backline is actively slow af, which it has been this year and last. You'd like to think we'd be going for another centre as well which will then have Robertson filling in all around the backline rather than being first choice in any position. As long as we don't retain Blake, I think it will be a pretty big improvement on the back line we currently have which I'm fairly happy with

Now, how these quicker lads will fare being told to run straight into forwards that are twice their side every tackle, I don't know!

I still think you should have signed two props.

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Tue Aug 27, 2024 10:28 pm  

Zig wrote:

Good. There’s a reason he got a two game ban and Asiata one, both will miss matches against Warrington

I think there's probably an element of letting him play the last game at home too. 14 years is a long time to have your last goodbye taken away.

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Wed Aug 28, 2024 8:10 am  

Seems like a sentimental decision the Makinson one. A second red for a similar incident must put him at the top of the range surely.

The game has changed unfortunately and everyone has to get used to this new reality. Players, refs and disciplinary are all struggling with it at the moment, as are us fans. There are almost certainly more adjustments to be made over the next couple of years too. I've got a bit of sympathy with everyone as it's undoubtedly a more difficult game to play, some of these head contacts are impossible to avoid and yet are being punished the same as deliberate contact. I'd have the Smith incident a much higher grading than any ban that comes from players falling into tackles but we aren't there yet.

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Wed Aug 28, 2024 8:21 am  

SFW wrote:

Seems like a sentimental decision the Makinson one. A second red for a similar incident must put him at the top of the range surely.

The game has changed unfortunately and everyone has to get used to this new reality. Players, refs and disciplinary are all struggling with it at the moment, as are us fans. There are almost certainly more adjustments to be made over the next couple of years too. I've got a bit of sympathy with everyone as it's undoubtedly a more difficult game to play, some of these head contacts are impossible to avoid and yet are being punished the same as deliberate contact. I'd have the Smith incident a much higher grading than any ban that comes from players falling into tackles but we aren't there yet.

Smith got 3 games (rightfully so) and Franklin Pele also got 3 games for his challenge on opening night and when you stack them up against challenges like that Makinson one and other accidental contacts like the Liam Byrne one on Good Friday, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me but then when you throw in the fact Hiku did the same as Smith/Pele, to Jai Field in the CC semi and faced no action whatsoever, it becomes a farce!

You can accidentally hit somebody in the head and be banned for multiple games but trying to elbow drop somebody in the head can be fair game. I'd love to see Paul Cullen or whoever challenged on how that Hiku incident was let go.

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Wed Aug 28, 2024 9:07 am  

NickyKiss wrote:

Smith got 3 games (rightfully so) and Franklin Pele also got 3 games for his challenge on opening night and when you stack them up against challenges like that Makinson one and other accidental contacts like the Liam Byrne one on Good Friday, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me but then when you throw in the fact Hiku did the same as Smith/Pele, to Jai Field in the CC semi and faced no action whatsoever, it becomes a farce!

You can accidentally hit somebody in the head and be banned for multiple games but trying to elbow drop somebody in the head can be fair game. I'd love to see Paul Cullen or whoever challenged on how that Hiku incident was let go.

I don't think it's just a symptom of the ill thought-out chaos we are struggling with currently.

Didn't Blake Green receive a blatant blow in the face while lying on the ground in a Grand Final, which resulted in a fractured eye-socket, and no action was taken?

This is a genuine question, because something might have been done about it later, though nothing was done at the time and Wigan gained no advantage on the day.

The Disciplinary are a clown show and have been for a long time. The idea that someone like Cullen should be involved is beyond laughable given the on-field career that he had.

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Wed Aug 28, 2024 10:45 am  

Phuzzy wrote:

I think there's probably an element of letting him play the last game at home too. 14 years is a long time to have your last goodbye taken away.

If that is the case then it is a poor decision, there are plenty of players who have missed a big game through suspension. I would like to think that Tommy won his appeal on merit and yes I am glad that he can say his goodbyes. Had Saints offered him the same deal as Feldt he wouldn't be going anywhere hmm.

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Wed Aug 28, 2024 10:50 am  

NickyKiss wrote:

Smith got 3 games (rightfully so) and Franklin Pele also got 3 games for his challenge on opening night and when you stack them up against challenges like that Makinson one and other accidental contacts like the Liam Byrne one on Good Friday, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me but then when you throw in the fact Hiku did the same as Smith/Pele, to Jai Field in the CC semi and faced no action whatsoever, it becomes a farce!

You can accidentally hit somebody in the head and be banned for multiple games but trying to elbow drop somebody in the head can be fair game. I'd love to see Paul Cullen or whoever challenged on how that Hiku incident was let go.

The reasoning they gave was that no contact was made, which is why I asked the question at the time regarding Smith. Should that even come into it though? The intent is the same either way and as we're supposed to be trying to discourage deliberate attacks to the head it makes you wonder what they're thinking.

Re: Wigan v Sts discussion - THIS THREAD ONLY PLEASE : Wed Aug 28, 2024 10:58 am  

Zig wrote:

If that is the case then it is a poor decision, there are plenty of players who have missed a big game through suspension. I would like to think that Tommy won his appeal on merit and yes I am glad that he can say his goodbyes. Had Saints offered him the same deal as Feldt he wouldn't be going anywhere hmm.

Given that we are more than happy to give new contracts to ageing players- Lomax, Walmsley, then how are you sure we haven't offered him 2 years? How do you know that Makinson hasn't asked away for a new challenge?

Why would we waste a quota spot if he wanted to stay?