markill wrote:To cause even more of a ruckus...One thing McIlorum needs to improve is defence!
We all love his hard hitting no nonsense attitude. But really, he misses too many tackles. He has one of the worst tackle success rates of any hooker in the league. By the way, Logan, Williams and Powell when playing as our back up hookers have much better tackle success numbers in the last two years.
I know the stat can be misleading, but you all must see it. For all the positives, Micky misses too many tackles. It's pointless being in opponents faces if they just bounce off you and keep going, or if you give a penalty away. That happens too much with Micky in the last couple of years. Sometimes he gets the crowd up or fires his teammates up, and that's great, but sometimes what's needed is to stop your man and wrap up the ball. If he was more selective about what was needed when, we might see a better performance. It might also save a bit more of him physically to do better with the ball, although I think he showed he has a bit more range and versatility in attack at times this year even though it wasn't his best overall.
...and yet we had the best defence in the league!!
You are bang on, stats can be misleading!!
Not sure what your point is sorry. And I'm not having a go or trying to start a fall out by saying this, just trying to understand - are you suggesting that it doesn't matter what McIlorum can improve on defensively on an individual basis because the team collectively conceded fewer points than other teams? Or are you saying that we had the best defence in the league because of McIlorum's sub 90% tackle success?
I know you're the chairman of the McIlorum fan club. That's fine, I like him too, but I do think that his performances are overrated by some Wigan fans. I do think he can become as good as you think he is, I just don't think he actually is as good as you think he is. Certainly not on a consistent basis over the body of his career anyway.
markill wrote:To cause even more of a ruckus...One thing McIlorum needs to improve is defence!
We all love his hard hitting no nonsense attitude. But really, he misses too many tackles. He has one of the worst tackle success rates of any hooker in the league. By the way, Logan, Williams and Powell when playing as our back up hookers have much better tackle success numbers in the last two years.
I know the stat can be misleading, but you all must see it. For all the positives, Micky misses too many tackles. It's pointless being in opponents faces if they just bounce off you and keep going, or if you give a penalty away. That happens too much with Micky in the last couple of years. Sometimes he gets the crowd up or fires his teammates up, and that's great, but sometimes what's needed is to stop your man and wrap up the ball. If he was more selective about what was needed when, we might see a better performance. It might also save a bit more of him physically to do better with the ball, although I think he showed he has a bit more range and versatility in attack at times this year even though it wasn't his best overall.
...and yet we had the best defence in the league!!
You are bang on, stats can be misleading!!
Not sure what your point is sorry. And I'm not having a go or trying to start a fall out by saying this, just trying to understand - are you suggesting that it doesn't matter what McIlorum can improve on defensively on an individual basis because the team collectively conceded fewer points than other teams? Or are you saying that we had the best defence in the league because of McIlorum's sub 90% tackle success?
I know you're the chairman of the McIlorum fan club. That's fine, I like him too, but I do think that his performances are overrated by some Wigan fans. I do think he can become as good as you think he is, I just don't think he actually is as good as you think he is. Certainly not on a consistent basis over the body of his career anyway.
My point is we have/had the best defence in super league and I am certain MM is a big part of that so he must do many things right defensively.
Do we have stats on position of players tackled, size of players tackled, 1st man tackles, amount of tackles, timing of tackles? Like I said stats are misleading, in my opinion along with Roby he is the best defensive hooker in SL.
I have already said that he had an off season and still has much to work on, but he is in my opinion along with Lockers our most influential player, Bateman and Farrell are heading that way. Without him we would be a lot weaker and not won what we have in recent seasons.
Wonder if the treble winning team of this season would sign him if they could?
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
I have no doubt Macs missed tackles are last ditch efforts trying to cover for others or simply trying to add extra umph to a tackle. I doubt he misses any when it truly matters. To be honest if the hooker role was simply about defence he would get my vote for No 1 in the world.
TrueBlueWarrior wrote:
My point is we have/had the best defence in super league and I am certain MM is a big part of that so he must do many things right defensively.
Do we have stats on position of players tackled, size of players tackled, 1st man tackles, amount of tackles, timing of tackles? Like I said stats are misleading, in my opinion along with Roby he is the best defensive hooker in SL.
I have already said that he had an off season and still has much to work on, but he is in my opinion along with Lockers our most influential player, Bateman and Farrell are heading that way. Without him we would be a lot weaker and not won what we have in recent seasons.
Wonder if the treble winning team of this season would sign him if they could?
cpwigan wrote:I have no doubt Macs missed tackles are last ditch efforts trying to cover for others or simply trying to add extra umph to a tackle. I doubt he misses any when it truly matters. To be honest if the hooker role was simply about defence he would get my vote for No 1 in the world.
Both these things are your own personal opinions and observations/recollections. And I can't/don't necessarily disagree and also you will know the available numbers don't give the level of context you want.
Micky's attitude, intent and conviction can't be questioned. It's why we wouldn't swap him.
His execution though needs to be improved. His consistency needs to improve. In defence as well as attack. He can be good enough to deserve England selection. He hasn't been.
To be completely honest markill I don't disagree with you regarding MM in terms of the season just gone! I still stand by him being a fantastic defensive hooker but as you allude to there is still room for improvement and even more so in attack! The original point I made was about a full strength NZ coming at us in their own back yard, I would have MM in my 13 all day long!! I love my MM just like you love your stats and as you say stats are misleading at times and I suppose my love for MM is!!
He needs to improve in 2016!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
cpwigan wrote:I have no doubt Macs missed tackles are last ditch efforts trying to cover for others or simply trying to add extra umph to a tackle. I doubt he misses any when it truly matters. To be honest if the hooker role was simply about defence he would get my vote for No 1 in the world.
Me to and that's why he would be at least in my 17 which would leave Roby free to run wild when he comes on!! I agree however that this year has been a weak one for MM and Hodgson deserves a shot!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
Regarder une fille en bikini, c'est comme avoir un revolver chargé sur sa table:
Il n'y a rien de mal a ça mais il est difficile de penser à autre chose.
TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Let's not get carried away here, that was a weakened NZ team without doubt. Playing them in their own backyard with their strongest team out I would have MM for in his defence alone and then Roby to come on and work his magic in attack as well as him still being a strong defender!! Hodgson in my opinion would get found out!!
Weakened NZ team is a bit of an exscuse. England were missing 2 Burgess with Sam coming back and a certaim full back.
England also were bedding in a new pairing at 6 and 7. Difference is fitness NZ looked gone at 60. Sign of the changes in the game. Previously GB or England were tired at that point.
Apart from off loads NZ looked poor. 2nd half was as good of an international display as you will see by a young side who will get better.
What are your views now Gimble?
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Let's not get carried away here, that was a weakened NZ team without doubt. Playing them in their own backyard with their strongest team out I would have MM for in his defence alone and then Roby to come on and work his magic in attack as well as him still being a strong defender!! Hodgson in my opinion would get found out!!
Weakened NZ team is a bit of an exscuse. England were missing 2 Burgess with Sam coming back and a certaim full back.
England also were bedding in a new pairing at 6 and 7. Difference is fitness NZ looked gone at 60. Sign of the changes in the game. Previously GB or England were tired at that point.
Apart from off loads NZ looked poor. 2nd half was as good of an international display as you will see by a young side who will get better.
What are your views now Gimble?
Difference today was simple England was bullied down the middle and Williams was poor if that was Matty Smith a 10 page thread would have been up by now. New Zealand pack did not get moved around enough. Given how poor England were NZ created 1 try through luck and skill at the same time. If Graham got a bit of luck than that game is a draw. That was poor by England nothing special from NZ.
As for MM he can defend but so can Roby and both Hodgson and Roby offer more in attack. But as I said before I would just run with Roby.
I would put Hardaker at centre move Bateman to the bench and go with Roby for 80.
But as I said if England had the 2 Sam's would have won the game. Hardaker is truly awful FB as an attacking force at that level.
As for the fitness levels if England move the ball around and move the pack around NZ will go as they did last week. As for NZ missing players would be the same given the importance SB and ST is to England. Johnson is a very good player and they miss him.
Odd I watched a different game but hey life is opinions.
Two teams battled fantastically and were separated by a single try. For me, it reminded me of GB losing to Aus in the WC at Wembley by a single Renouf try.
I am mystified how any pack can be bullied in such a close game with a singly try. Both packs deserve the utmost praise and if I was one of those forwards I would royally peed off at such negative comments.
NZ had the better field position / possession which baffles me as to how anybody expects any half-back to dominate. My biggest criticism would the inability to target an injured NZ player out on the wing and that was on Widdops side N.B.
No to me it was a fantastic match. Uncompromising, never say die. A test match.
The Graham try could have been interesting had he scored it. You could say ah but NZ had one after (indeed they did) I am not sure if that NZ potential try would have come had Graham scored. If / but. A fantastic test match / series.
