Millward's Influenece

[wiganrldeanh]

Doug Stand posted:
Hold on... now I know on a previous post I have said that I would cease with my witch hunt on Danny Orr... but that doesn't mean that I'm going to join Hayleys fan club as it seems a few of you have.
Danny Orr up until the Wakefield game has been at best poor.
We have had constant threads on this which I've no wish to open up again... the jist being he was kack because no settled half-back partner, wasn't fit, did too much tackling blah, blah, blah... I rebutted those claims in particlular the one of defence. No offence meant here Dean but I just thought it was inherently wrong on Danny Orr's part that he was defending so much and this was not a feather in his cap for me more lack of common sense.
Personally I think it just came down to Danny Orr was trying to hard.

So yes Danny Orr has improved and I feel it's no co-incidence that Millward is in charge and Danny Orr is playing better.

I for one am delighted and I hope he become what you all think he is only better... but I'm not getting carried away just yet.

well what im saying Doug is that Orr may improve alot next season as he will have a decent pack infront of him

[Fraggle]

wiganrldeanh posted:
well what im saying Doug is that Orr may improve alot next season as he will have a decent pack infront of him

And equally... he may not!

[wiganrldeanh]

Fraggle posted:

wiganrldeanh posted:
well what im saying Doug is that Orr may improve alot next season as he will have a decent pack infront of him

And equally... he may not!

mite not do but we wont know until next season.

[WiganWarrior]

It would be good for us to see a new signing who can cover stand off so we have more options, if Orr gets injured im not particularly happy with Brown as our only option

[GeoffN]

WiganWarrior posted:
It would be good for us to see a new signing who can cover stand off so we have more options, if Orr gets injured im not particularly happy with Brown as our only option

But that brings us back to the old debate about reserves...under the 20/20 rule we (or any other club) can't keep top-class specialist players as cover for all positions. The 20 will normally be the starting 17 plus 3 "utility" players...a specialist stand-off in reserve would simply limit our options for the other 2 squad places.
The same argument applies to any other position, as we've discussed with cover for Rads recently.

[DaveO]

Doug Stand posted:
I rebutted those claims in particlular the one of defence. No offence meant here Dean but I just thought it was inherently wrong on Danny Orr's part that he was defending so much and this was not a feather in his cap for me more lack of common sense.

Sorry but I think that is plain daft! If he had not made the tackles who would have? What was he supposed to do, say over to you <put name of player who should have done the job here> and step aside?

If Danny Orr was tackling too much it was because the rest of the team wasn't doing its fair share.

Basicaly you are blaming him for someone else's shortcoming!

Dave

[Exiled Wiganer]

Orr was doing a lot of tackling, and he might have been targeted by opposing teams, and I would blame him for that. I think it was incumbent on him to put himself in a position in the defensive line where he could avoid making as many; in effect, saying "you - 2nd rower whose job it is to make 40 tackles - step in and make the tackle". It showed some willingness, but at the same time he was not taking the line on or doing anything creative with the ball in his hands, which was his main responsibility.

Still, he is playing better, probably for a combination of reasons, including the team going better, and his being fully fit. I wish we had Thorman or Rooney instead, but he's not our biggest problem.

It looks to me that we have solved the pack for next year, with up to 15 forwards who can do a job, but the back line looks like taking a bit longer.

In any case, with O'Loughlin and Fletcher around we will have far more creativity elsewhere on the team, allowing us to reduce the pressure on the halves. I have watched Moran play dozens of times, and he does not have the vision to run a team, but put him in a side with play makers, such as Dymock at London, and he will certainly contribute to the cause.

Finally, I started this meaning to pay tribute to Millward. He has done so much in his limited time with us, and with his limited resources. They now look as if they have an idea where they should stand and how they should run.

[cpwigan]

The big problem with Danny Orr was that he came with such high expectations given he was fantastic for Cas.

[Doveoverdave]

cpwigan posted:
The big problem with Danny Orr was that he came with such high expectations given he was fantastic for Cas.

He was a big fish in a little pond at Cas, at Wigan he has always looked out of his depth.

I again agree with Doug about his defensive duties - he is no Hanley or John Woods for that matter, who could also put in the defensive work and still be fabulous in attack.

[DaveO]

Doug Stand posted:

DaveO posted:
Basicaly you are blaming him for someone else's shortcoming!
Dave

I suppose in a way I am... the blame is to be equally divided amongst Denis Betts, the pack, whoever else wasn't pulling their weight and Danny Orr.
Danny Orr is a seasoned professional, has captained his club and county. He should have been able to spot the problem and say this is wrong... then again Denis Betts should have as well.

You can spot the problem but if the players who should be doing more aren't up to the job or continue to be lazy you will still have the problem.

A lot of teams with their prize asset being their stand-off would move the player out of the way in defence. I always remember Brett Kenny standing out in the centres when the hard fraft was being done. Made sense...

Long does it as well at Saints but then someone else is there to do the work. Who is that man at Wigan? That is who you should be slagging off.

So yes I am blaming him because I'm assuming that he said nothing to Betts about the defence and that Betts didn't explicitly tell him to go out and tackle like a prop.
It's not a stand-off's job to do that. There was only one man could top the tackle count from stand-off and be equally effective in attack and that was Hanley and I'm sure we'll all agree that Orr is no Hanley.

Sorry but this still does not make sense. The thing you seem to be forgetting is that at the end of the day other players were not pulling their weight to put Orr in the position of having to tackle himself to a standstill.

Orr can tell Betts, he can yell at the other players all he likes (which he appears to do being one of the most vocal on the pitch) but if they don't or won't do the work he can either adopt their attitude and not bother, or he can do what he has been doing and try make up for poor play from his team mates.

To slag him off for giving 100% when those around him are not is a very biased view to take and making suppositions about what Betts told him to do (or didn't) isn't much of an argument in my book.

At the end of the day if you are a committed player and the defence is full of holes you will try and plug the leaks. If a few more players had aopted Orr's attitude he would not be tackling as much as he does and we would have a better defensive record.

As to harkng back to past players I am sure were Edwards still playing for us with the current team he would be tackling as much as Orr.

Dave