Re: Wakefield (a) : Sun Jul 09, 2023 10:14 pm  

Luppylad wrote:

You can see marshall foot in front of kicker which is by letter of the law offside also look at french trey look how your star player griffiths obstructs liam hood when he comes away from the scrum and hood is the last player to touch french had that been an official wigan player no try,typical of fans like you oh the mighty wigan lost cos of ref well worst team to many just did you...

absolutely unbelievable-you have just had a great win and now you have the audacity to go on your opponents forum to challenge and look for a no try to rub the salt in the wound.

Re: Wakefield (a) : Mon Jul 10, 2023 5:33 pm  

Luppylad wrote:

You can see marshall foot in front of kicker which is by letter of the law offside also look at french trey look how your star player griffiths obstructs liam hood when he comes away from the scrum and hood is the last player to touch french had that been an official wigan player no try,typical of fans like you oh the mighty wigan lost cos of ref well worst team to many just did you...

behind the ball not the kicker....learn the rules you plumb

Re: Wakefield (a) : Tue Jul 11, 2023 7:03 am  

Luppylad wrote:

Me neither but i do see 27 26 in my fish n chip paper

Now you've gone and ruined fish n chips for me

Seriously, go and catch Cas!

Re: Wakefield (a) : Tue Jul 11, 2023 1:56 pm  

Just watching it back, can someone tell me why Miski’s try wasn’t given on 15:15?

Clear knock on by Langi then immediately grounded by Miski

Re: Wakefield (a) : Tue Jul 11, 2023 2:12 pm  

Having just the watched the match here are a couple thoughts.

Firstly, in light of a couple posts from Wakey fans, I need to address the reffing. If you want the very definition of "refereeing inconsistency" check out Wakefield's first kick of the game and the one that was penalised at the end. There is absolutely no difference yet one was given as a penalty. Neither was a penalty. Secondly, the last "knock on" that turned possession over was a disgraceful decision. In the end, credit to Wakefield for hanging in there when the game was "gone" but, ultimately, the game was gifted to them by two utterly ridiculous refereeing decisions.

On to Wigan.

There's nothing wrong with Cust per se, but unfortunately he adds nothing extra. Using a bench spot just to give O'Neil a 10 minute breather, especially for a team light on props, is tantamount to recklessness. Peet needs to be ruthless. I'm sure Cade is a great guy but enough already! Play the extra forward that we actually need. If O'Neill needs a break, slot Shorrocks in at dummy half for 10 minutes. An extra forward is FAR more useful to us than a "more of the same" interchange hooker for a few minutes a match.

Field MUST play 6. We abandoned that far too early. If he doesn't trust him defending in the line switch him and French around when defending. Bevan is far more effective at 1. Jai is far more effective than Bevan attacking in the line. For God's sake use the tools at our disposal to their best advantage. The "conundrum" is only that if we make it one, which is exactly what we're doing at the moment.

Mago was fine. The performance he put in at Wakefield would have been exactly what we need from a bench prop. Unfortunately, minus Cooper, Havard and Ellis, we're lacking too much firepower before he comes on. There isn't a simple answer but playing an extra forward would certainly help.

Nsemba has to play. He was the best back rower on the pitch. Again. I understand he and Hill are young but players will be back soon. Rest them then. Right now we need them on the pitch.

Congrats to Wakefield. The win could revitalise them for the back end of the season but I can't help feeling that was one that got away.

Re: Wakefield (a) : Wed Jul 12, 2023 3:20 am  

waykee fans think its only there team that the refs are against - should be in championship outa way

Re: Wakefield (a) : Wed Jul 12, 2023 5:38 am  

Phuzzy wrote:

Having just the watched the match here are a couple thoughts.

Firstly, in light of a couple posts from Wakey fans, I need to address the reffing. If you want the very definition of "refereeing inconsistency" check out Wakefield's first kick of the game and the one that was penalised at the end. There is absolutely no difference yet one was given as a penalty. Neither was a penalty. Secondly, the last "knock on" that turned possession over was a disgraceful decision. In the end, credit to Wakefield for hanging in there when the game was "gone" but, ultimately, the game was gifted to them by two utterly ridiculous refereeing decisions.

On to Wigan.

There's nothing wrong with Cust per se, but unfortunately he adds nothing extra. Using a bench spot just to give O'Neil a 10 minute breather, especially for a team light on props, is tantamount to recklessness. Peet needs to be ruthless. I'm sure Cade is a great guy but enough already! Play the extra forward that we actually need. If O'Neill needs a break, slot Shorrocks in at dummy half for 10 minutes. An extra forward is FAR more useful to us than a "more of the same" interchange hooker for a few minutes a match.

Field MUST play 6. We abandoned that far too early. If he doesn't trust him defending in the line switch him and French around when defending. Bevan is far more effective at 1. Jai is far more effective than Bevan attacking in the line. For God's sake use the tools at our disposal to their best advantage. The "conundrum" is only that if we make it one, which is exactly what we're doing at the moment.

Mago was fine. The performance he put in at Wakefield would have been exactly what we need from a bench prop. Unfortunately, minus Cooper, Havard and Ellis, we're lacking too much firepower before he comes on. There isn't a simple answer but playing an extra forward would certainly help.

Nsemba has to play. He was the best back rower on the pitch. Again. I understand he and Hill are young but players will be back soon. Rest them then. Right now we need them on the pitch.

Congrats to Wakefield. The win could revitalise them for the back end of the season but I can't help feeling that was one that got away.

Agree with all that Phuzzy, Shorrocks for me needs to be in the team somewhere so with Isa, KPP back soon along with Nsemba’s form he should replace Cust on the bench.

Shorrocks isn’t great at hooker but like you say for 10/15 minutes he’ll be fine and solid defensively. Can cover loose/backrow/halfback too.

Agree on Field at 6, French at 1 (at least when we have the ball) needs to be given a longer chance.

Re: Wakefield (a) : Wed Jul 12, 2023 6:38 am  

Cust is adding next to nothing in his spells. Maybe it’s not his fault, as 10-15 minutes isn’t very long to make an impact but we’ve also conceded points in some of his spells (in in games where we’ve conceded far less than we did at Wakey). That last bench spot being taken by Shorrocks as a utility is definitely the way to go IMO. He may as well give O’Neill the breather and that will at least keep us solid around the middle.

I put on the other forum that I thought we were far too quick to dump Field from 6 but changing it a week out from a cup semi would be brave. I’m not sure I’d change it now. I put Fridays loss all on the teams lack of concentration and the props getting bullied. I actually thought French took a step forward at 6, in that he seemed more prepared to take the line on.

Re: Wakefield (a) : Wed Jul 12, 2023 8:31 am  

Cust is a half.

He needs to play half for full games or not be in the 17 unless we are desperate for cover at 9.

He offers nothing from the bench.

Despite them playing different positions it’s a choice between Cust and Miski who is in the 17.

With Miski playing so well he is virtually impossible to drop, but the knock on issue is whilst French is a great attacking individual the team is suffering because of a lack of direction in the halves, French also is a great threat on the wing individually however his weakness is carrying the ball early in sets, which is a key attribute of our play.

Like others I would like to see Field at 6 and French at 1, as I do not believe French is a half, Field I think is more suited to that role. I understand the desire to see them swap in defence but personally I don’t like that idea as I feel it’s somewhat pandering to a defensive fragility that Field needs to address.

Re: Wakefield (a) : Wed Jul 12, 2023 9:04 am  

I think we would all prefer to see Bevan at 1, but Peet has said many times that he prefers Field at 1 and I think given what happened at Magic he won't move from that now. Real shame as that Leigh performance looked like the start of something special until the injury.