Absolutely and Woolf makes it obvious that he has no consideration for England’s needs (why should he I suppose), so I fully expect any operation will be done as soon as Saints season is done.
Absolutely and Woolf makes it obvious that he has no consideration for England’s needs (why should he I suppose), so I fully expect any operation will be done as soon as Saints season is done.
Your first paragraph is bang on and I agree with all of it even the fact that Bell may or may not be the answer.
However I genuinely feel that the first 40 mins on Saturday was our worst 40 for some time. I just think that we won't be that bad again against you. Once we raised our game in the second half, there looked to be only one winner. So yes whilst I agree there probably isn't as much improvement in us there is in Wigan, I stand by the fact that if we play anwhere near to the standards we have set, we win the next game against you and in a Final if we meet.
Woolf gambled on a particular set up in that first half and he got it badly wrong. The second half he fixed it.
If I'm wrong I'll come back on here like I did yesterday when it would've been easy for me to hide and not come back on. I'll hold my hands up and admit that you were right and I was wrong.
And credit where its due you did say before the game that you thought Wigan would win and you never veered from that at all.
Fair comment Stu, and I wouldn't expect you to think anything different. That's the joy of sport and being a supporter.
To continue the discussion a little I disagree on a few points. The first 40 was arguably the worst of your season but you're giving no credit to Wigan for that. You had plenty field position and attack in our 20 but you couldn't do anything with it. That wasn't due to the errors that Simm, Lomax etc made. That only had a bearing on our attack. The truth is our defence was comfortable in that first half.
Now I'm sure you'll say that's because you were clunky and that you fixed it for 20 minutes of the 2nd half. I take a different view. We gifted you the opportunities in that 20 minutes just as you would claim you gifted us the first half and the winning try. That's how games are won and lost. You can't have it both ways. If you accept that, then nothing changes. You weren't good enough when we were at our best (or you at your worst); we weren't good enough when you were at your best (or us at our worst). I'm arguing that, given your current situation and our continued improvement that we'll be at our best more often and at our worst less often than you will.
There's a long way to go this season and both our seasons could change in an instant. However, at the time of writing, I think what I'm saying is pretty fair.
Fair comment Stu, and I wouldn't expect you to think anything different. That's the joy of sport and being a supporter.
To continue the discussion a little I disagree on a few points. The first 40 was arguably the worst of your season but you're giving no credit to Wigan for that. You had plenty field position and attack in our 20 but you couldn't do anything with it. That wasn't due to the errors that Simm, Lomax etc made. That only had a bearing on our attack. The truth is our defence was comfortable in that first half.
Now I'm sure you'll say that's because you were clunky and that you fixed it for 20 minutes of the 2nd half. I take a different view. We gifted you the opportunities in that 20 minutes just as you would claim you gifted us the first half and the winning try. That's how games are won and lost. You can't have it both ways. If you accept that, then nothing changes. You weren't good enough when we were at our best (or you at your worst); we weren't good enough when you were at your best (or us at our worst). I'm arguing that, given your current situation and our continued improvement that we'll be at our best more often and at our worst less often than you will.
There's a long way to go this season and both our seasons could change in an instant. However, at the time of writing, I think what I'm saying is pretty fair.
Well the ref gave them a few penalties when they needed them 2nd half and missed an offside for one of their tries, so I suppose they were back to their best
Well the ref gave them a few penalties when they needed them 2nd half and missed an offside for one of their tries, so I suppose they were back to their best
I’ve watched that second half a couple of times now and Saints intensity was great but I didn’t see any huge cause for concern that makes you think the next game against them will be a walkover. We threw a good bit at then towards the end of the game and that last 20 minutes was a real 50/50 tussle. Don’t get me wrong you have to be very clean against them with your errors and penalties and we weren’t and that hurt us but clean that up and we’ve shown not just in the first half but in the last 20 mins that we can trouble them.
Saints had a good ten to fifteen minutes where they were allowed to gather momentum and scored three quick tries. In the final ten minutes of the match once Marshall had scored it was predominantly Wigan who saw the game out and looked like the team most likely to score again. In fact we very nearly did, but for a last ditch shirt grab by Lomax on Field he'd probably have been away and under the sticks - 26-18.
I don't think necessarily had a shocking first half, yes things didn't go their way and that's cause we managed to handle them.
We could definitely say the same, our mistakes could have cost us, had French not dropped the high bomb or Thornley had tackled Hurrell around the legs tries could have been prevented.
In the end I'd say the better team won, which bodes well for the rest of the season now the monkey is off our back.
The question that should be being asked is a very simple one. Can our improvement continue to the point that it closes the (increasingly small) gap between us? Saturday suggests it can.
That's what i was getting at in my original post - what areas should we look at improving to make beating Saints a regular occurence.
We've shown we can handle Walmsley and the starting props. We've shown we can create panic and gaps in their defence.
They created some panic in ours through bombs close to our line and aggressive chasing - we need to improve how we protect the receiver - which they do very well. We also need to shut down Pasi.
The fact they scored from 2 kicks shows how well our defence handled their attack - so we tighten this area up by being smarter.
The very fact there has been so much hand wringing about a few injuries is laughable for the 'best team in SL by a mile' , every team goes through injuries and Saints seem to have been luckier than most in the past few years. Interesting to see how they handle this going forward, especially if they lose a forward or two......
When the cloak of invincibility slips it often gives the opposition a 10% uplift in their effort as they go into the game with more belief rather than feeling beat before they start. A few more losses and we'll see how Red V react !
That's what i was getting at in my original post - what areas should we look at improving to make beating Saints a regular occurence.
We've shown we can handle Walmsley and the starting props. We've shown we can create panic and gaps in their defence.
They created some panic in ours through bombs close to our line and aggressive chasing - we need to improve how we protect the receiver - which they do very well. We also need to shut down Pasi.
The fact they scored from 2 kicks shows how well our defence handled their attack - so we tighten this area up by being smarter.
The very fact there has been so much hand wringing about a few injuries is laughable for the 'best team in SL by a mile' , every team goes through injuries and Saints seem to have been luckier than most in the past few years. Interesting to see how they handle this going forward, especially if they lose a forward or two......
When the cloak of invincibility slips it often gives the opposition a 10% uplift in their effort as they go into the game with more belief rather than feeling beat before they start. A few more losses and we'll see how Red V react !
One target they’re seemingly going to be giving teams is Johnny Lomax. It’s not going to help them if they keep needing to shuffle the side around, depending on being in attack or defence to protect him. Teams are going to go full throttle at him and rightfully so. I noted Kane Linnett only lasted 20 minutes with a similar problem, so it’s not going to be easy. When you think Dodds is out as well, there is now a big problem for them. They’ve not be anything like fluent this past two weeks and that is unlikely to change.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 256 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...