: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:20 pm  

we played far better against wigan end of.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:22 pm  

MOPSEY LIVES ON wrote:

do you think we were better tactically has weve no halves fit and if you like bored the opposition into making errors playing safety first rugby

Exactly - not exciting to watch, but very effective, low error count and playing to a well executed game-plan.

Of course I would hope we can play a little more expansively when our half-back are around, but we have become the masters of control and for all the bluster in the Hudds / Cas game last night, both sides were guilty of trying to blow the game through the lack of control.

As it is, albeit we have played 6 games so far, we are the highest points scorers in SL, so we must be getting them somewhere?

I also think it would be unkind on our players to underestimate the quality of the opposition pack today - that was a great effort against that lot!

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:22 pm  

StanTHEWildcat wrote:

we played far better against wigan end of.

you know, its actually great to be arguing about which game we played best in!

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:24 pm  

StanTHEWildcat wrote:

we played far better against wigan end of.

Different day; different opposition; different conditions.

But if that's what you reckon, then fair enough!

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:27 pm  

main reason against wigan at no stage did i think we would lose, today when it went 12-10 i thought ffs here we go again dominating a game then letting opposition get right back into it. whatever jk said at halftime certainly worked.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:32 pm  

I think some people on here judge a performance solely on how well we throw the ball around. We can't all be St Helens.

Whilst the game may not have been a classic, Wakefield actually played very well indeed, though admittedly not for 80 mins. We can't all be St Helens.

Some of the "technical" things they did were very strong.

The defence, technically, was very good; aggressive and determined.
Some of the attack was similarly good; the drive charges of Ferguson for example.

If we play as "badly" as that all season and keep winning, then I am happy. I would like them to play better, of course, but anyone who thinks today was a bad performance is pork.

Can I say that?

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:32 pm  

MOPSEY LIVES ON wrote:

your kidding arnt you trb it was gutsy and we got the points but for me we were a bit all over today, weve played better than that. it was a bit of a dour match imo very scrappy

Don't know how you come to that conclusion, were you facing the pitch?

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:34 pm  

MOPSEY LIVES ON wrote:

do you actually watch the games

Do you? Did you not notice a couple of top dar tries - I did.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:35 pm  

dboy wrote:

I think some people on here judge a performance solely on how well we throw the ball around. We can't all be St Helens.

Whilst the game may not have been a classic, Wakefield actually played very well indeed, though admittedly not for 80 mins. We can't all be St Helens.

Some of the "technical" things they did were very strong.

The defence, technically, was very good; aggressive and determined.
Some of the attack was similarly good; the drive charges of Ferguson for example.

If we play as "badly" as that all season and keep winning, then I am happy. I would like them to play better, of course, but anyone who thinks today was a bad performance is pork.

Can I say that?

No!

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 6:40 pm  

How about "they are talking tripe" or, "they are making a pig's ear of their analysis" or, "they should trot along"?