London game

Discuss all things Wigan Warriors. Comments and opinions on all aspects of the club's performance are welcome.
User avatar
EagleEyePie
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:42 pm

Re: London game

Post by EagleEyePie »

DaveO wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:03 pm And it backfired pretty much every time then as well. The point here is though we already had a weakened side and Lam chose to make it even weaker in the area we had injuries. Idiotic.

In any case this idea it’s risking players on plastic is bollocks in my view. I have never agreed with it. If it’s not safe for one player it’s not safe for them all. It’s a lame excuse IM

You just made all that up so you could agree with yourself in the last sentence. You have no idea why he did it and who did or didn’t have any input. All we do know is we were three forwards down before Lam decided to make it four and the reason given was the plastic pitch not injury.

I didn’t know Marshall was ill and it is probably unfair of Lam to put such blame on Escare but it begs the question if Marshall was fit, where was Lam going to play Escare? He clearly was intending to so unless he was going to copy Wane with the “switcheroo” I have no idea where he fits in.
The first two words in the paragraph you quoted were 'I assume'. So yes, I don't know for sure why he made the decision just like nobody else does because neither I, nor they, are Adrian Lam. However, who do you think the head coach is going to get his information from regarding injuries to players and the risks? Presumably it's the medical staff the club is paid to employ. Given the club didn't risk certain players on the ipitch when Wane was in charge, and the new head coach has done the same thing with the same reasoning, it's not beyond belief that other people might have an input.

He also didn't make the team weaker in the area we had injuries. We had Clubb, Navarrete, Bullock, Tautai and Partington in the front row and O'Loughlin also making up the middles. It was the back row that we had issues with since Greenwood and Hamlin were likely to play there and missed out.

While I do think the front row is far too weak without Flower, it's not like there isn't previous cause for concern with artificial pitches. Burgess, Shorrocks and Gregson have all suffered very serious injuries on the artificial pitch in recent years. They had known knee/ankle problems in the past but were fully fit at the time.

Post match the suggestion does seem to be that the props played well though, so while I think we miss Flower in any game, it sounds like it was the outside backs and the halves that let us down and that the front row put in an improved performance.

Phil Wilkinson from the WEP said Escare was originally on the bench, which suggests either coming on at fullback, or possibly more likely to replace Sammut in the halves. However, that would have meant he was planning to go into that game with Leuluai and Escare on the bench and only two forwards, which sounds like a risk.
Wiganer Ted
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: London game

Post by Wiganer Ted »

Naming only one player after a defeat is poor.
Lam needs to sort out the team and himself.
Not looking very good at the moment.
moto748
Posts: 4634
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:30 pm

Re: London game

Post by moto748 »

No, it doesn't. I didn't know Marshall was ill either, but it looks harsh on Escaré.
Mike1993
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2018 5:03 pm

Re: London game

Post by Mike1993 »

For me what’s going on at Wigan is similar to what happened at Man United after Fergie left. We have an average squad that overachieved because the coach could get players to run through walls for him and now he’s been replaced by a less experienced coach we’re being exposed.

For me it’s up to Lenegan to sort this mess out and if that means letting players go to free up funds for higher quality players then so be it. I know he had a dream of a team made up of entirely Wiganer’s winning a trophy but that is just not achievable. I hate to compare us to Wire but there’s a buzz around the club at the moment because they’ve got a genuine marquee player at the club and they’ve got another one on the way. Our playing squad has gradually reduced in quality since I’d say 2012 and now we’re suffering for it.
DaveO
Posts: 15899
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: London game

Post by DaveO »

EagleEyePie wrote:
DaveO wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:03 pm And it backfired pretty much every time then as well. The point here is though we already had a weakened side and Lam chose to make it even weaker in the area we had injuries. Idiotic.

In any case this idea it’s risking players on plastic is bollocks in my view. I have never agreed with it. If it’s not safe for one player it’s not safe for them all. It’s a lame excuse IM

You just made all that up so you could agree with yourself in the last sentence. You have no idea why he did it and who did or didn’t have any input. All we do know is we were three forwards down before Lam decided to make it four and the reason given was the plastic pitch not injury.

I didn’t know Marshall was ill and it is probably unfair of Lam to put such blame on Escare but it begs the question if Marshall was fit, where was Lam going to play Escare? He clearly was intending to so unless he was going to copy Wane with the “switcheroo” I have no idea where he fits in.
The first two words in the paragraph you quoted were 'I assume'. So yes, I don't know for sure why he made the decision just like nobody else does because neither I, nor they, are Adrian Lam. However, who do you think the head coach is going to get his information from regarding injuries to players and the risks? Presumably it's the medical staff the club is paid to employ. Given the club didn't risk certain players on the ipitch when Wane was in charge, and the new head coach has done the same thing with the same reasoning, it's not beyond belief that other people might have an input.

He also didn't make the team weaker in the area we had injuries. We had Clubb, Navarrete, Bullock, Tautai and Partington in the front row and O'Loughlin also making up the middles. It was the back row that we had issues with since Greenwood and Hamlin were likely to play there and missed out.

While I do think the front row is far too weak without Flower, it's not like there isn't previous cause for concern with artificial pitches. Burgess, Shorrocks and Gregson have all suffered very serious injuries on the artificial pitch in recent years. They had known knee/ankle problems in the past but were fully fit at the time.

Post match the suggestion does seem to be that the props played well though, so while I think we miss Flower in any game, it sounds like it was the outside backs and the halves that let us down and that the front row put in an improved performance.

Phil Wilkinson from the WEP said Escare was originally on the bench, which suggests either coming on at fullback, or possibly more likely to replace Sammut in the halves. However, that would have meant he was planning to go into that game with Leuluai and Escare on the bench and only two forwards, which sounds like a risk.
The reason given for not playing Flower by Lam was the pitch so speculating otherwise is pointless. As to not making the pack weaker by not playing Flower it’s just silly to suggest that is not the case. Our two senior props are Flower and Clubb and normally both will always play. Given none of the props bar Flower have shown good form so far this season including Clubb I fail to see how anyone can conclude that was not weakening the pack at the same time as the back row was suffering from injuries.

As I said regarding the plastic pitch if it’s not safe for one player it’s not safe for all of them and I don’t recall other teams being as paranoid about playing on them as Wigan seem to be.
No straw damn us
Posts: 2065
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:12 am

Re: London game

Post by No straw damn us »

Looking at the stats from yesterday it looks as though all the props did their work, with Bullock, Navarrette and Clubb going for over 100 metres. Tautai did a lot of the tackling and made the most tackle busts.

The last few years we have used our outside backs, particularly the wingers to carry the ball out of defense. This appears to have been curtailed under Lam, Davies metres have dropped by around half.
morley pie eater
Posts: 3248
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 2:01 pm

Re: London game

Post by morley pie eater »

I didn't see the game, but have two questions:
Does the team selection suggest Lam underestimates "weaker" opposition?
I understand we ended up with Isa at centre. Why not Hardaker's to centre and Escaré to full back?
Wigan ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Saints ⭐⭐⭐
josie andrews
Posts: 35775
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:17 pm
Location: Wigan
Contact:

Re: London game

Post by josie andrews »

morley pie eater wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:58 pm I didn't see the game, but have two questions:
Does the team selection suggest Lam underestimates "weaker" opposition?
I understand we ended up with Isa at centre. Why not Hardaker's to centre and Escaré to full back?
I said exactly this!
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage. #18thMan
DaveO
Posts: 15899
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: London game

Post by DaveO »

morley pie eater wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:58 pm I didn't see the game, but have two questions:
Does the team selection suggest Lam underestimates "weaker" opposition?
I understand we ended up with Isa at centre. Why not Hardaker's to centre and Escaré to full back?
Who would have played on the wing? One of the junior players?
No straw damn us
Posts: 2065
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:12 am

Re: London game

Post by No straw damn us »

DaveO wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 2:57 pm
morley pie eater wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:58 pm I didn't see the game, but have two questions:
Does the team selection suggest Lam underestimates "weaker" opposition?
I understand we ended up with Isa at centre. Why not Hardaker's to centre and Escaré to full back?
Who would have played on the wing? One of the junior players?

He couldn't have done that, Sarginson went off injured so Lam switched Isa to centre. Doing what's been suggested would have meant three positional changes.
Post Reply