Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:19 pm  

jonh wrote:

I think Lam deserves a lot of credit for how he sent the team out and how we played in the first half.

I thought his decisions in the second half, particularly his use of subs, was appalling and contributed to the loss.

Powell out on his feet from about 25-30 mins in and Bourouh gets 5 minutes at the end. Even in his 5 minutes he offered something different and carried a threat but what’s the point picking him? No Mitch Clark another baffling call. He isn’t perfect but he’s a point of difference again and if you have no intention to give Bourouh a decent crack, just pick the extra forward.

I can’t wait for Lam to go tbh. He’s just not good enough.

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:22 pm  

WireWireWire wrote:

Play should have stopped perhaps, or at least it should have gone to the screen, I was surprised it didn't. He wasn't kicked in the head btw, it was a shin on Charnleys other leg that made contact. But Lam is an absolute whopper, you were nowhere near the better team, how could you be when you went down to a team with 44% completion in the first half and Sitaleki Akuoala on the wing? He's an idiot.

How could a team with a 44% completion rate be the better team?

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:23 pm  

You’ve dished out plenty in the past and like Leeds, can’t always expect it your way. Great to hear the whinge fest post game. And the BAFTA goes to…………

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:28 pm  

DizzyHeights wrote:

Played for the penalty by staying down and didn’t get it, he wasn’t bad today but Marshall’s play acting there was a disgrace.

Are you stupid he failed his HIA and is now missing for the game on Sunday

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:32 pm  

We got murdered at the ruck as usual against the better teams.

Wire players playing the ball much much quicker.

That’s why we lost the game not ref decisions.

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:46 pm  

CobraCraig wrote:

I thought we were the better team, the sky team seemed to think so too.

I'm not sure that swings it much .

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:50 pm  

NSW wrote:

We got murdered at the ruck as usual against the better teams.

Wire players playing the ball much much quicker.

That’s why we lost the game not ref decisions.

As a wire fan I thought you were miles quicker at the play the ball. You lost cos you've got seriously NO attacking talent in your team(which is bad for the game!). Warrington were awful tonight and still won by 13 points. The game is in trouble

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:59 pm  

I thought we had improved over last few weeks, though that's not hard as we was shot with injuries and confidence. French covered up a lot of our lack of cut last season. Hastings is playing his nuts off but without cut off our other play makers it's a tough ask. I think you can carry one half with no running threat but not two or in our case three.
I don't think we got the bounce of the ball which happens but I do disagree that the call on Marshall didn't cost us a real chance of the win. I have not seen it since I got home but on the screen it was accidental contact to the head a clear penalty. I'm not a ref basher but no excuses for not going to the screen?
I thought we was well on top first half and they scored against the run of play.
We should have gone in with a two score difference or at least that's how it felt live, I always think it's different than on tv. Second half was 50-50 but the try changed the way the game went after that point.
I do not get Lams sub thoughts or structure.
If your on the bench and offer enough to get there and then if you also offer something that we miss badly(a ball player who can run) then why wait to the last 5 minutes to play him when games gone.
Is Clarke or Bullock injured because a twenty minute stint off either would have been more bennificial than having a hooker sat on the bench for 75.
I also think having our best half in the halves would be worth a go.
Can't argue with the efforts and I'm sure Zack Bateman Field and Smithies will add plenty to a team that for me though flat with the ball was not far off tonight . I have found us frustrating to watch for the last 5 or 6 seasons we make the easy hard and the hard impossible. We are not without talent but whatever we are coached makes us look like it!

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:18 pm  

I’m just baffled what goes on in the week on the training field because we certainly don’t look to have an idea of what the attacking game plan is out on the field. It’s hard to even describe what it is that we’re producing with the ball. It’s just 80 minutes of nothingness. No off the cuff plays, no set moves, no offloading game, no power game, just nothing, literally nothing.

It’s a shame that such a great player for us will leave this club after his time coaching us and when people mention his name in years to come, it’ll send a shudder through me and I’ll think of him in negative terms but it’s been truly dreadful to watch us these last few seasons. We’re averaging 15 points a game this season and that’s less per game on average than Leigh (who average 16 points). In our last 9 games we’re averaging 10 points per game. It’s is just astonishingly poor and whilst we may have a few injuries to contend with, it’s just no excuse for numbers that low.

Re: Lam's after-match comments : Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:35 pm  

Trainman wrote:

He got kicked in the head which caused him to loose the ball, I agree it was accidental but it’s still a penalty.

Is it, though? The laws of the game state: A player is guilty of misconduct if he, when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly.

I certainly don't think what Charnley did was intentional or reckless. Careless? I think you could argue that either way.

For what it's worth, I think it should have gone to the video ref, but I'm not sure how he would have ruled it.