Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 3:02 pm  

apollosghost wrote:

I think next week for Saints will show where you are at the minute, no way were you going to put in a performance last night like you did against Cas but backing last night up against Wire is going to be a big ask at the best of times.
We all know you're getting Walmsley Batchelor and Knowles back in the next few weeks which will take a lot of pressure off your young lads, big question though is does Wellens know what your best 1 6 7 is because that's going to be the key to you doing anything this year, get that right and I certainly won't be writing Saints off

I think we will lose next week, and probably end up finishing 4th if I had to guess, so we'll certainly be doing it the hard way. Think the lads will be drained after last night, especially with only 1 bloody sub being used! Could change if we get any bodies back but I've not seen anything about that happening.
As for the best 1 6 and 7, I'm not sure what the answer is at all but I don't think Wellens will be dropping Lomax like he did with Dodd. I'd really like to see 1 Robertson 6 Welsby 7 Dodd 9 Clark with Burns on the bench actually getting a good rotation to see how that looks, but I don't see it happening. With Mbye back next week, I think we'll see Robertson miss out with Welsby back to fullback and Mbye/Lomax in the halves. It's tough to say after everything he's done for us, but this year seems a year too far for Lomax. He doesn't look effective in either attack or defence and is doing us more harm than good this year.

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 3:09 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

And tell me how effective your attack has been when you've dominated position and possession? It's been the same story for a couple of years and that's not just my opinion but that of most of your fans too.

Us missing those chances has sweet FA to do with our playmakers being missing. We'd already made the breaks. I'll give you good defence on holding Wardle up (but the chance had still been made) but the 2 Marshall kicks were sitters by his normal standards. He nails that kick time and again and, if anything, the 2nd one last night was easier than most of those he's nailed. Farrimiond was in acres of space in mid field. A little dink towards the posts and it was a walk in.

I also think you're missing the fact that we had 1 half of our half back pairing spending much of the game having to cover for no hooker which would clearly impact on our attack which was still considerably better than yours.

And you need to read RedVee if you want a one eyed opinion on the referee mate. Or just read your own post. All the wrong decisions were against Saints were they? Really? I mean...really?

Not very effective obviously, but when the pack is there we spend the majority of the game camped in the oppos half so it has less of an effect generally.
As for the kicks, you also have to ask why he felt the need to try and attempt a cross field kick instead of going himself (he's very fast) or passing to somebody close by. I'd say that's down to what was very good, desperate scramble defence. Without that, its a simple inside pass and a try (like Welsbys)

But I was never trying to say our attack was effective, I was contending your point that you didn't see us as much of a threat as Wire, due to our attack and then used last night to back it up, but our attack not being effective didn't stop us winning in 2022, or winning the majority of our games last year etc and last night goes against the grain, generally, from what we are used to, which is playing most of the game in dominant field position.

As for the decisions, you've just made up what I've said and argued against it lmao. I never said all the wrong decisions were for Saints. I said he missed a lot and gave an example of one that was big and I gave another example that I said I thought he got right. I just had to laugh at somebody saying they thought we got the rub of the green

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 3:23 pm  

The Reaper wrote:

Not very effective obviously, but when the pack is there we spend the majority of the game camped in the oppos half so it has less of an effect generally.
As for the kicks, you also have to ask why he felt the need to try and attempt a cross field kick instead of going himself (he's very fast) or passing to somebody close by. I'd say that's down to what was very good, desperate scramble defence. Without that, its a simple inside pass and a try (like Welsbys)

But I was never trying to say our attack was effective, I was contending your point that you didn't see us as much of a threat as Wire, due to our attack and then used last night to back it up, but our attack not being effective didn't stop us winning in 2022, or winning the majority of our games last year etc and last night goes against the grain, generally, from what we are used to, which is playing most of the game in dominant field position.

As for the decisions, you've just made up what I've said and argued against it lmao. I never said all the wrong decisions were for Saints. I said he missed a lot and gave an example of one that was big and I gave another example that I said I thought he got right. I just had to laugh at somebody saying they thought we got the rub of the green

Firstly I said in the original post that it's been your problem for a couple of years so saying I was using last night to back it up is ridiculous. I used last night to illustrate how big the difference between the two is in that, even without 4 of our spine (including interchange hooker) we still had comfortably the better attack. Your returning players will give you better field position (I said that as well) but you haven't been able to do much with it for a fair while now, which is why I suggested you aren't the biggest threat this year (as you weren't last year). Carry on reading what you want though mate if it makes you feel better.

As for your comments on the Wigan fans opinion on the refereeing please point out all the examples you gave where he got it wrong in Saints' favour because I must have missed those. You're as one eyed as anyone else and you're complaining about it on a Wigan board to boot! Again, point out where you're complaining about the Saints' fans one eyed version of events on RedVee. You can't? What a surprise!

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 4:19 pm  

jonh wrote:

Nsemba was lifting people off the ground with the ferocity of his defence at times.

It was a bad miss by him for one of the Saints tries however generally he was an absolute menace in defence last night.

Walters needs time. He’s not had a great start to his Wigan career but there is still time. I do worry that the new rules go somewhat against him and his size. Nsemba is a big boy too but looks more athletic I think Walters is a bit less agile and is struggling to adapt to the lower tackle height and the knock on implications of it, ie quicker ptb’s.

I’m not giving up on Walters I just think that he would be better suited as a middle.

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 4:31 pm  

Pleased in the main with that last night. I expected to lose but the effort was there. Eckersley was deserved MOM, he was outstanding. You can see the physical difference between him and Robertson given he is 2 years older. Robertson hasn’t started training full-time yet.

After a shaky start, Robertson did well and Peet to his credit praised him afterwards too. He’ll make mistakes, he’s 18, he’ll make them next week too if he plays but he’ll also give us something different and it’s clear he is going to be a very good player.

I think Wigan struggled attack wise without French. I know they were missing a few too but French is such a special player that he makes things happen. They had a tonne of possession first half and played us a man down for 10 mins but didn’t look like scoring before Eckersley got on the outside shoulder of Lomax and put Wardle in. That missed tackle is another example of the decline of Lomax.

We get our big players back and I’m more confident that we will be right in the mix and more than capable of winning the big games.

Have to say though the lack of subs from Wellens was appalling. He’s absolutely flogged that pack and Sironen, Lees and Delaney will be sore all week. I dread to think how they can back up.

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 4:55 pm  

Stu M wrote:

Pleased in the main with that last night. I expected to lose but the effort was there. Eckersley was deserved MOM, he was outstanding. You can see the physical difference between him and Robertson given he is 2 years older. Robertson hasn’t started training full-time yet.

After a shaky start, Robertson did well and Peet to his credit praised him afterwards too. He’ll make mistakes, he’s 18, he’ll make them next week too if he plays but he’ll also give us something different and it’s clear he is going to be a very good player.

I think Wigan struggled attack wise without French. I know they were missing a few too but French is such a special player that he makes things happen. They had a tonne of possession first half and played us a man down for 10 mins but didn’t look like scoring before Eckersley got on the outside shoulder of Lomax and put Wardle in. That missed tackle is another example of the decline of Lomax.

We get our big players back and I’m more confident that we will be right in the mix and more than capable of winning the big games.

Have to say though the lack of subs from Wellens was appalling. He’s absolutely flogged that pack and Sironen, Lees and Delaney will be sore all week. I dread to think how they can back up.

Wigan’s biggest miss yesterday was O’Neill, both our attack and defence would have been much better. Brad does the hard work that makes room for others to play in, he sets the tempo defensively. I agree about Robertson and I have made the same comment about your forwards getting flogged in another post. I spoke with several of the Saints players last night (I won’t name them) and they were thankful that their shirt didn’t have Delaney on the back! I think you are right Stu, I will be very surprised if they can back that performance up next week. Sadly, in my view, Lomax has not been the same since his bicep injury it is time for him to move on. He spends more time impersonating a windmill than he does tackling, what was he complaining about when Eckersley ran past him to score the winning try? I have enjoyed the last two matches against Saints and Leigh, both were tough and uncompromising rugby games.

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 5:04 pm  

The Reaper wrote:

Not very effective obviously, but when the pack is there we spend the majority of the game camped in the oppos half so it has less of an effect generally.
As for the kicks, you also have to ask why he felt the need to try and attempt a cross field kick instead of going himself (he's very fast) or passing to somebody close by. I'd say that's down to what was very good, desperate scramble defence. Without that, its a simple inside pass and a try (like Welsbys)

But I was never trying to say our attack was effective, I was contending your point that you didn't see us as much of a threat as Wire, due to our attack and then used last night to back it up, but our attack not being effective didn't stop us winning in 2022, or winning the majority of our games last year etc and last night goes against the grain, generally, from what we are used to, which is playing most of the game in dominant field position.

As for the decisions, you've just made up what I've said and argued against it lmao. I never said all the wrong decisions were for Saints. I said he missed a lot and gave an example of one that was big and I gave another example that I said I thought he got right. I just had to laugh at somebody saying they thought we got the rub of the green

The game was refereed like a GF, and all the better for it. The game needs to flow to be a spectacle. If I had one criticism it would be Mr Moore’s policing of the offside rule hmm.

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 5:11 pm  

I sit in that corner of the South Stand where Eckersley scored, Lomax was desperately trying to get the ref to check for an obstruction but if you watch it back Farrell slams the brakes on before he reaches the defence, Lomax has been absolutely brilliant for Saints but this last extension they've given him looks like it could be a big mistake cap space wise

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 5:19 pm  

Stu M wrote:

Pleased in the main with that last night. I expected to lose but the effort was there. Eckersley was deserved MOM, he was outstanding. You can see the physical difference between him and Robertson given he is 2 years older. Robertson hasn’t started training full-time yet.

After a shaky start, Robertson did well and Peet to his credit praised him afterwards too. He’ll make mistakes, he’s 18, he’ll make them next week too if he plays but he’ll also give us something different and it’s clear he is going to be a very good player.

I think Wigan struggled attack wise without French. I know they were missing a few too but French is such a special player that he makes things happen. They had a tonne of possession first half and played us a man down for 10 mins but didn’t look like scoring before Eckersley got on the outside shoulder of Lomax and put Wardle in. That missed tackle is another example of the decline of Lomax.

We get our big players back and I’m more confident that we will be right in the mix and more than capable of winning the big games.

Have to say though the lack of subs from Wellens was appalling. He’s absolutely flogged that pack and Sironen, Lees and Delaney will be sore all week. I dread to think how they can back up.

I think it's a bit simplistic saying the attack struggled without French Stu. We missed him. Of course we did. any team would. But I think any clunkiness had more to do with having no hooker. It effectively gave us little distribution when Faz was there and took a half out of our systems when Farrimiond was there. We coped reasonably well but it was never going to be fluent. That said, we scored 3 tries and made at least 6 or 7 clear cut chances as I've said earlier. That's not bad against the often stated "best defense in the league".

Robertson looked good and offered something different in attack. Someone has said he's 6' 2"". Is that right?

Re: Saints (h) : Sat Jul 13, 2024 5:31 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

I think it's a bit simplistic saying the attack struggled without French Stu. We missed him. Of course we did. any team would. But I think any clunkiness had more to do with having no hooker. It effectively gave us little distribution when Faz was there and took a half out of our systems when Farrimiond was there. We coped reasonably well but it was never going to be fluent. That said, we scored 3 tries and made at least 6 or 7 clear cut chances as I've said earlier. That's not bad against the often stated "best defense in the league".

Robertson looked good and offered something different in attack. Someone has said he's 6' 2"". Is that right?

Yeah fair points but I guess we’ll see over the next 8 games or so. You did create some chances but then any team with pace and goes wide does the same. Salford have done it to us twice this season and Warrington did so in the Cup. Even under Woolf we struggled defensively against expansive sides. It’s why we won on Good Friday as for some reason Peet tried to take us on down the middle

And yes I think Robertson is 6,2. Still quite skinny but once he puts some size on that frame he’ll go from strength to strength. His footwork is outstanding