v Wakefield
Re: v Wakefield
People always said but what about McDermott etc and 3 years seems so harsh but maybe Jack was right.
- TrueBlueWarrior
- Posts: 6171
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: v Wakefield
As does waneball, arrogance, injuries etc.medlocke wrote:The imaginery 3 year rule pops up againTrueBlueWarrior wrote:Looking at your 3 year rule, then McDermott would have left before he won the treble last season!!cpwigan wrote:He will never walk so unless IL boots him we are stuck with him. People scoffed at my Jack Gibson, 3 years no more at a club but Wane has been here too long; maybe McDermott too at Leeds.![]()
I said we should freshen things up at the end of last season but saying the same things over and over is getting tedious!!
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
- TrueBlueWarrior
- Posts: 6171
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: v Wakefield
How? I hope you don't teach Maths cp!!cpwigan wrote:People always said but what about McDermott etc and 3 years seems so harsh but maybe Jack was right.
'If you start listening to the fans it won't be long before you're sitting with them.' - Wayne Bennett
-
- Posts: 3108
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:09 pm
Re: v Wakefield
Be careful, it's nearly bedtime and insomnia could be cured quite soon!medlocke wrote:The imaginery 3 year rule pops up againTrueBlueWarrior wrote:Looking at your 3 year rule, then McDermott would have left before he won the treble last season!!cpwigan wrote:He will never walk so unless IL boots him we are stuck with him. People scoffed at my Jack Gibson, 3 years no more at a club but Wane has been here too long; maybe McDermott too at Leeds.![]()

When John Byrom plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints - Jimmy Armfield
-
- Posts: 11308
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm
-
- Posts: 38446
- Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:17 pm
- Location: Wigan
- Contact:
Re: v Wakefield
Yeah your faultKittwazzer wrote:My fault and I take full responsibility. I should never have gone.
Sorry!


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
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
Re: v Wakefield
Is see Sutton as a prop Cherry. Personally, I would have combined Tautai and Burke at LF.cherry.pie wrote:Don't think there was much of a choice. We didn't really have anyone to put there who could match the defensive work rate and mobility of O'Loughlin or Bateman. Burke was probably a better bet but Sutton has played loose forward before.cpwigan wrote:Sutton at loose forward was bizarre IMO. We had Burke and Tea Towel on the bench.
No matter who played there we were always going to lack defensive mobility, particularly in the middle of the park. Mossop is now a joke of a player. Sutton was caught out badly a few times. Burke is good but is still prone to be beaten by players with a good step. Clubb must be carrying a knock because he's nowhere near his energetic self. Bretherton is usually a strong defender but he hasn't played in months so was probably lacking match fitness. Tautai is good for 15 minutes but will also be easily exposed when he tires.
Re: v Wakefield
How was Jack right? the only reason he didn't stay anywhere longer than 3 years was because he didn't like the board members interfering, it had nothing to do with the performance or success of the teamcpwigan wrote:People always said but what about McDermott etc and 3 years seems so harsh but maybe Jack was right.

-
- Posts: 11308
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm
Re: v Wakefield
They had their day at the beach. At around 20-0 they were chanting "Are you Rhinos in disguise?"!cpwigan wrote:How were the Wakey fans?
At 40 it was "We're gonna win the League"!
Last 5 minutes they dubbed us 'Wigan Rhinos'!