Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:22 pm  

Sweaty Betty's wrote: How many of those 27 did he miss? None. Missed tackles are recorded as a separate stat. He only missed 37 all season http://www.rugby-league.com/superleague ... ayer_stats

Sweaty Betty's wrote: How many of those 27 did he miss? None. Missed tackles are recorded as a separate stat. He only missed 37 all season http://www.rugby-league.com/superleague ... ayer_stats

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:30 pm  

From what I can tell (in truth I don't know what our props have been instructed) it's all about speed and 'finding your front'. Anyone who's played the game knows the importance of 'finding your front', especially for the props. Idea being the tackle ends with you facing the right direction, knees down first for a quick play the ball allowing fast distribution from the dummy half (9) to get the next play moving at speed catching defences off-guard who haven't got time to reset.

So once contact is made and you feel you're going down, don't let the opposition turn you over (turtle) or hold you up in the tackle allowing them to reset their line. Drop to knees and play the ball ASAP.

Disadvantage of this is not many yards made after hitting the defensive line... no fight or struggle in the line making more yards.

Just a matter of tactics.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:14 pm  

Early on in the season, with a young team, we sometimes got bullied but generally came back firing towards the end. I expected us to get players back and to be more robust throughout the game. What worried me was how quickly we ran out of puff, even with the wingers carrying the ball up. Sometime we got bullied towards the end of the game. I hope that this season the forwards benefit from the closed season and can cause some mayhem before being subbed.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:16 pm  

I think our style was impacted by two factors teams offloading in contact and and refs calling held earlier.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:20 am  

Cruncher wrote:

Do you actually think that Farrell and Mickey Mac played well last year?

Maybe not powderpuff, but very, very below standard.

Not by the standards they've set previously but that isn't the argument. As you rightly say, in no way can they be described as powderpuff and that's before we get to Lockers and Bateman. It's these catch all phrases that rile me and they almost exclusively come from people who, usually by their own admission, don't attended games. It's one if those things they hear down the pub (usually from other people who don't go to games) and then regurgitate all over forums and social media because they think it makes them look infiormed. It doesn't. It makes them look ignorant, childish and stupid. Frankly I'm tired of reading them as they are, quite literally, meaningless in any real context.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:41 am  

Gelling training with the NZ Warriors and close to agreeing a one year deal apparently.

Good to hear he’s getting sorted and in Rugby League.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:08 am  

NickyKiss wrote:

Gelling training with the NZ Warriors and close to agreeing a one year deal apparently.

Good to hear he’s getting sorted and in Rugby League.

Good to hear, however on his blog he said he was in contact with NZ Warriors and there was 'no room at the inn'. Maybe things have changed.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Thu Jan 11, 2018 10:18 am  

Phuzzy wrote:

Not by the standards they've set previously but that isn't the argument. As you rightly say, in no way can they be described as powderpuff and that's before we get to Lockers and Bateman. It's these catch all phrases that rile me and they almost exclusively come from people who, usually by their own admission, don't attended games. It's one if those things they hear down the pub (usually from other people who don't go to games) and then regurgitate all over forums and social media because they think it makes them look infiormed. It doesn't. It makes them look ignorant, childish and stupid. Frankly I'm tired of reading them as they are, quite literally, meaningless in any real context.

Even the props can point to some mitigating factors, like injuries, SW's ineffective deployment of them during game-time, etc.

But for me, the problem goes way beyond the front row, and encompasses quite a few of the playing staff. It's an apparent take-it-or-leave-it attitude, which may stem from the coach having 'lost the changing room', to coin a phrase, but is also indicative of personal indiscipline among the players.

A couple of examples: Williams and Tautai seemingly going through the motions after they'd secured their new deals. Comments attributed to Tommy L, in which he allegedly claims the club is not the same as it was and that he's not happy, which, if true, appear to display complete obliviousness to his own terrible form. Gelling just taking off to New Zealand despite being in the middle of a contract. Exciting new stories circulating that Sam was going to play stand-off in a brand new strategy, until he decided that he wanted to stay at full-back. Then there are some of those awful results: the Cas and Wakey games right at the end of the schedule were classic illustrations of a team that simply couldn't be a***d.

By the end of 2018, it will be a lot easier to send a few people on their way if things don't get sorted, but it's very frustrating when we all know just how well this current team can play if it's in the mood.

I honestly think that 'powderpuff' as a catch-all phrase is probably inaccurate, but is only mildly insulting given that the team has brought much of this scorn on itself.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:01 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

Not by the standards they've set previously but that isn't the argument. As you rightly say, in no way can they be described as powderpuff and that's before we get to Lockers and Bateman. It's these catch all phrases that rile me and they almost exclusively come from people who, usually by their own admission, don't attended games. It's one if those things they hear down the pub (usually from other people who don't go to games) and then regurgitate all over forums and social media because they think it makes them look infiormed. It doesn't. It makes them look ignorant, childish and stupid. Frankly I'm tired of reading them as they are, quite literally, meaningless in any real context.

I'm the guy who quoted powderpuff and I am season ticket holder and have supported the team for over 50 years so I assume that I am not in your "almost exclusively" bunch of people.

I am old school where packs need to dominate and I strongly feel that our pack is sadly lacking in aggression so I can either use powderpuff or repeatedly use a sentence to describe what I mean by that every time I comment on the subject. My definition of powderpuff in this context is lack of aggression, lack of intensity, poor fitness, small in stature, lack of presence, no shoitehouse attitude when its hey lads hey..... I could go on.
I want a pack that intimidates and bullies the opposition pack not one that concentrates a quick play the ball at the expense of everything else. If you could advise on a better word than powderpuff then I would be happy to utilise it.

I don't rate any of our props with the exception of Sutton who I think has good potential. Maybe it is the way they are asked to play and maybe this season they will revert to a more traditional style,maybe it is because they aren't particularly good or maybe I am a dinosaur and "middles" are here to stay so I should put up or shut up. I sincerely hope that the issue is style and approach rather than capabilities but based and the last few seasons my only conclusion is the latter but if proven wrong will gladly eat my words.
SW talks of the Wigan way and doing things "tough" well I want to see it not hear it but I feel we just lack that physical presence to really intimidate the opposition.

Maybe just maybe the end of last season was a wake up call and this forthcoming season we will see a different front row which I genuinely hope is the case. It's a new season so hopefully a new start.

With regards to SOL I think that he is the best forward in the competition and a hard lad who tackles to hurt. We just need him on the pitch for more minutes and we need some more guys in the with the same attitude.

Personally I am not over convinced with the Bateman tough guy image and will take a good big un before a good little un everyday of the week however, if Bateman had a few other forwards around doing more of the strong arm work then we would be a very different proposition on the pitch. I am not anti Bateman by any stretch of the imagination just don't see him as the enforcer type.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Fri Jan 12, 2018 12:53 am  

How about 'ineffective' Itchy? Is it really so hard to find an alternative word? It took me about a nanosecond to think of that one.

As to your points; I agree with some and I disagree with some. "A good big un will always beat a good little un' is another of those regurgitated catch all phrases that actually doesn't hold water. A good little un will always be beaten by a BETTER big un, but then the reverse is equally true. Every one of those catch alls has an opposite, equally often quoted, phrase to counter it. That's why I think they're meaningless. I'll offer up 'it's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog' to counter your 'big un' and illustrate the point.

As a point for discussion, and to continue your 'powderpuff' theory, could you tell me, individually, which of our forwards you consider not aggressive enough? Particularly in light of opposition fans insistence that our pack are thugs and play to bully the opposition, more often than not overstepping what is acceptable. Also in light of the fact that pretty much this same pack had taken out numerous trophies in recent seasons.

I understand and share the frustrations of last season and, to a lesser degree, previous seasons. But to level the blame at a 'powderpuff' pack is, in my opinion, both wrong and lazy. In fact, injuries aside, I think it's far more the case that unforced errors and needless penalties are to blame. Address that and, as the saying goes, the rest will follow.

Cruncher: see above. Hope this addresses my thoughts re: your post too. I agree with much of what you say. I think there are some unnecessarily negative takes on things but that seems par for the course on here these days.