[DaveO]

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 9:29 am  

The Whiffy Kipper wrote:

jonh wrote:

Yes, also with him having been at the club for so long it will take at least a year or 2 to change the culture.

That isn’t a criticism of Wane it is a credit to him, however it is a very difficult job for the next man unless they want to maintain a watered down version of the Wane years.

Could the clique that is rumoured to be at the club be players Waney brought through from a young age?, Talks of certain players being shunned, If so the offenders need ousting

That is what I was referring to. I thought it was interesting jonh was suggesting a player clear out and was wondering why.

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 9:35 am  

Wigan seem to have lost around 1/3 of its core support and moreover the course if SW tenure...it's a trend seemingly continuing under Lam....
It makes blaming SW inconclusive...
Is the fault pitch and coach related or does it go higher to Rads and IL, or a combination?

Something is seriously wrong at Wigan...and IL would be reluctant to blame himself.

[DaveO]

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 9:53 am  

NickyKiss wrote:

The issue I have is Lam has used returning players as a life raft but realistically there’s only Faz who’ll be back this season who would make a major difference. He said last night Clubb is back for the Wire game but I’m not sure we should risk him. He looked totally unfit and sluggish before his knee injury, so it’s tough to see how he’ll cope with the pace of a CC tie against Wire.

The Clubb situation sums up the problem Lam faces. The two props who most would say are our two first choice, Clubb and Flower, have been in and out of the side with injury and even when they play they seem shadows of their former selves. Flower looked far form fit last night. Bullock does well but he's not outstanding, he's in the "good player" list, but the fact he's better than Navarette and TT shows how weak we are in the front row. In the 2nd row we have Greenwood and a.n.other since Faz got injured, such as Isa who is another bang average player and with Lockers a bit part player who is as likely to come on as a prop as anything else our 13 is seemingly the newly promoted Smithies. Lam also has a problem at 9 in that because Powell's only attribute is being 3rd man in for 57 tackles a match he is alternating him with Tommy who can't do the minutes.

I am far from convinced Lam is the man for job myself but what Lam is supposed to do with such a naff pack I am not sure.

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 9:55 am  

CobraCraig wrote:

He arguably had a worse team to pick from the season before last and we came 6th.

Similar squad to last year minus MM, Gelling and FPN

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 10:06 am  

Flower looked in pain every time he stood up last night.

Bullock has done so well in such a short space of time. He's been put in an unfair position - should have been playing a supporting role and is now our main prop.

I thought Navarette did OK, don't remember seeing too much of Tautai.

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 10:17 am  

Bigredwarrior wrote:

I think there’s two sides to this.

Firstly to answer your question, yes I’d like Lam to be given the job long term. At least 2 more years. We’ve seen some scintillating attack in glimpses (1st half against Cas for example) and we’ve seen that we can defend, keeping two teams tryless for example. What we need to see is both elements put together consistently. To do that, we’ll need some consistency in the 17. I’m not using the injuries as an excuse but I do consider it a mitigating factor.

Secondly and I think just as importantly, is would I want the job if I was Adrian Lam? The negativity towards him is huge and he must surely see and feel it. Furthermore, I’d be asking the chairman what resources were available to me and what caliber of player could I bring to the club?

Without resources I’d say any coach coming in is on a hiding to nothing.

Mate, you're watching a different game to me. Our attack is on par with Wane's team at best. We have scored some scintillating tries, but not at a higher frequency than under Wane.

Everything else is worse.

I understand Lam has been hamstrung by a lack of investment, but the prospect of watching a side coached by this balloon for 2 more years, is not wetting the appetite.

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 10:35 am  

Suzy Banyon wrote:

Mate, you're watching a different game to me. Our attack is on par with Wane's team at best. We have scored some scintillating tries, but not at a higher frequency than under Wane.

Everything else is worse.

I understand Lam has been hamstrung by a lack of investment, but the prospect of watching a side coached by this balloon for 2 more years, is not wetting the appetite.

We have been far better to watch in attack this season than in any season under Waney, despite the obvious injury situation. Go back to the injury ravaged seasons of 2 & 3 years ago (such as when Wakey beat us 62-0) because otherwise you’re comparing apples with oranges.
Our attack against Catalan and in the 1st half versus Cas was some of the best rugby I’ve seen from Wigan for a very long time. Defensively we’ve been poor but we have now conceded just 1 try (from a kick) in the last two games.

Lam has not had a fair crack at it yet and your ‘balloon’ comment typifies that fact. We need to judge him when we’ve at least had some consistency in the squad. If we get some consistency and the rugby is still hit & miss, then I’ll accept it might be a coaching issue.

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 10:54 am  

Bigredwarrior wrote:

We have been far better to watch in attack this season than in any season under Waney, despite the obvious injury situation. Go back to the injury ravaged seasons of 2 & 3 years ago (such as when Wakey beat us 62-0) because otherwise you’re comparing apples with oranges.
Our attack against Catalan and in the 1st half versus Cas was some of the best rugby I’ve seen from Wigan for a very long time. Defensively we’ve been poor but we have now conceded just 1 try (from a kick) in the last two games.

Lam has not had a fair crack at it yet and your ‘balloon’ comment typifies that fact. We need to judge him when we’ve at least had some consistency in the squad. If we get some consistency and the rugby is still hit & miss, then I’ll accept it might be a coaching issue.

We won the gf in 2016...

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 11:03 am  

Pieman wrote:

We won the gf in 2016...

Correct, which is exactly my point. We had a spell where we couldn’t buy a win that year but we turned it around. I’m not saying that’ll happen again but we need to judge Lammy when he’s been able to choose a consistent squad. That is my only pointing this thread really.

Re: THE WANEY HATERS : Fri May 03, 2019 11:29 am  

I keep hearing it said that the squad isn't much different to the one that won the GF last year. That's all good and well but it's completely irrelevant if you can't play them! Last night only 5 of the starting team was from last year's Grand Final 17. On the bench we had 3 more. That's a total of 8, or in other words, less than half of the players who played in the final. Just to give that further perspective, the situation has at times been even worse than that with one particular match only having 3 of the GF winning team able to take the field!

BRW makes the point that people are currently comparing apples and oranges and I have to say that is the most accurate comment I've read so far on this thread. Whether Lam can turn it round (as Wane had to in previous seasons) is the true test. I'm not convinced we have the squad available even when fully fit. However, I do know that the Easter period is not the time to be judging this. I've seen enough flat games over this period from championship winning teams to know that with absolute certainty.