A nuance

cpwigan · Post by **cpwigan** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 12:49 am

I need to see my GP but I have to give credit to Wane and/or his coaching team because some of the best attacks v Leeds happened with 6 and 7 playing alongside each other in attack, passing to each other.

Just to make me feel better. The 2nd man stuff was largely poop and we showed we played better keeping it simple.

shaunedwardsfanclub · Mon Jun 01, 2015 12:56 am

cpwigan wrote:I need to see my GP but I have to give credit to Wane and/or his coaching team because some of the best attacks v Leeds happened with 7 and 7 playing alongside each other in attack, passing to each other.

Just to make me feel better. The 2nd man stuff was largely poop and we showed we played better keeping it simple.

In the second half we controlled the ball a lot better, made very few mistakes, controlled field position and never looked like losing. When we deploy such tactics we are very difficult to beat. Had we taken all our chances the score line could have been embarrassing for Leeds.

I too like both halves linking together as it gives us so many more options in attack.

Wintergreen · Post by **Wintergreen** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 11:29 am

Agree we were better BUT a few questions I would have:

1. Why is Matty Smith in the team?
2. Ditto Connor Farrell- one of the amusing scenes was where he appearted to be giving George some "advice" after G's try. A donkey giving one of best prospects in the country a few pointers....
3. What has Hampshire done to deserve to be left out?
4. Plan A worked. The sign of a great coach is where Plan A fails, Plan B is trotted out and wins the game. Of course this is not Wane's fault, so it's not a criticism, more an observation.
5. Connor Farrell? If he's "Wigan Standard" then I'm "Van Wintergreen".

AdamMac · Post by **AdamMac** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 12:02 pm

Almost a wane compliment from you there CP

medlocke · Post by **medlocke** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 12:27 pm

Wintergreen wrote:Agree we were better BUT a few questions I would have:

1. Why is Matty Smith in the team?

3. What has Hampshire done to deserve to be left out?

5. Connor Farrell? If he's "Wigan Standard" then I'm "Van Wintergreen".

1. Because he is a proven player and Lance Todd Trophy winner

3. What has Hampshire done to warrant replacing Matty Smith
(it's not his god given right)

5. Please explain "Wigan Standard"

TrueBlueWarrior · Post by **TrueBlueWarrior** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 1:11 pm

Wintergreen wrote:Agree we were better BUT a few questions I would have:

1. Why is Matty Smith in the team?
2. Ditto Connor Farrell- one of the amusing scenes was where he appearted to be giving George some "advice" after G's try. A donkey giving one of best prospects in the country a few pointers....
3. What has Hampshire done to deserve to be left out?
4. Plan A worked. The sign of a great coach is where Plan A fails, Plan B is trotted out and wins the game. Of course this is not Wane's fault, so it's not a criticism, more an observation.
5. Connor Farrell? If he's "Wigan Standard" then I'm "Van Wintergreen".

Wow!

1. He deserves to be!
2. He might have been asking for advice!
3. Played awful and unfortunately an experienced NRL player was waiting for his chance.
4. Plan A is Waneball is it not? So for me it was Plan B that worked.
5. Judging him on what 3 appearances, good job we didn't do that for Pat Richards as he certainly turned out to be 'Wigan standard' whatever that is!

cpwigan · Post by **cpwigan** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 1:38 pm

AdamMac wrote:Almost a wane compliment from you there CP

I know scary. My GP did not understand though and said I am as normal as the rest of the human race. Quack I think!

markill · Post by **markill** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 1:56 pm

cpwigan wrote:I need to see my GP but I have to give credit to Wane and/or his coaching team because some of the best attacks v Leeds happened with 6 and 7 playing alongside each other in attack, passing to each other.

Just to make me feel better. The 2nd man stuff was largely poop and we showed we played better keeping it simple.

I'm not sure its a nuance. We've seen it a lot this season. Once we realised that we couldn't play the way we had without Lockers, we switched to predominantly passing from one half to another with the change up being the occasional pass from a forward. This has particularly been the case in attacking situations rather than the spread-it-wide-in-our-own-half situations, and actually our attack suffered when we went away from it against Hull KR in the Cup.

cpwigan · Post by **cpwigan** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 2:35 pm

It is certainly more prevalent this season than previously.

Wintergreen · Post by **Wintergreen** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:11 pm

medlocke wrote:
Wintergreen wrote:Agree we were better BUT a few questions I would have:

1. Why is Matty Smith in the team?

3. What has Hampshire done to deserve to be left out?

5. Connor Farrell? If he's "Wigan Standard" then I'm "Van Wintergreen".
1. Because he is a proven player and Lance Todd Trophy winner

3. What has Hampshire done to warrant replacing Matty Smith
(it's not his god given right)

5. Please explain "Wigan Standard"

1. Because he is a proven player and Lance Todd Trophy winner

So is Joe Lydon and I wouldn't want him near the team either.

3. What has Hampshire done to warrant replacing Matty Smith
(it's not his god given right)

Agreed, but given Smith is adding very very little at the moment, wouldn't it be sensible to play him in his natural position? If you like "take a look at him".

5. Please explain "Wigan Standard"

Certainly. Subjective of course, but imo it's a level of ability that is higher than average for the level of Superleague as a whole. Will that do?

A nuance

A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance

Re: A nuance