How poor is our attack?

[PaulC]

Well you know what they say there are lies, damned lies and statistics but even the stats tell you it has got worse for several seasons now.

It's obvious to anyone who watches the matches that the attack is poor. It's down right awful within the last 20m and we seem devoid of guile and ideas close to the line and are easy to close down. The attack in this areas of the pitch is for me the biggest reason our attack has declined over recent seasons statistically as well as being perceived to be so by the fans.

With a bit more flair in that area I am sure we would have won several more matches this season and not be sat on a knife edge for a top four place.

No Dave, not statistics, facts. Wigan are now second highest try scorers behind Castleford. If the attack was THAT bad then this wouldn't be the case would it?

Saying we are second covers up a multitude of sins. Cas scored 134 tries and kicked 120 goals. We scored 104 and kicked 68. Doesn't look so hot then does it?

That is why we are at P23 L10 W10 D3 v their P23 W20 L3 in the regular season. This is the stat that matters and why we are on a knife edge for a top four place.

Do you or do you not agree with me that our attack looks naff in the last 20M?

Lol, you deleted your post while I was replying

The poor kicking is something we can all agree on - circa 65% conversion is poor

Putting that in to context, when playing Cas for every 6 points they score we need to score 8! 2-1 on tries, pretty tough task that!

[DaveO]

DaveO

Do you or do you not agree with me that our attack has looked devoid of ideas in the last 20m?

If you want some facts here are some.

Tries scored for Wigan:

2010 161
2011 150
2012 183
2013 159
2014 151
2015 112
2016 91
2017 104

Before 2010 under Noble we saw similar figures to what we see now. Paul Deacon left in 2015 when the tries scored fell off a cliff.

Anyone who doesn't think the attack has been poor for the last three seasons based on watching the actual games AND the statistics doesn't want to see.

The fact we are second to Cas (who scored 134 tries and kicked 120 goals v our 104 and 68) must be one of the most irrelevant statistics of all time including the fact it makes us sound better than we have been when you see how far away from them we actually are. It's why the only stat that matters reads P23 W20 L3 for Cas and P23 L10 W10 D3 for us.

You are quoting end of season Try volumes there vs almost end of season volumes - So we should on full season (end of super 8s) volumes be on circa 120 Tries (give or take!)

Not disagreeing with you at all BTW, under Wane our attack hasn't been as good at all, that said though, unless you compare this to all other teams and their try numbers it doesn't mean a lot - the game goes through phases of change, some teams have an amazing try scoring record one year and go on to win nothing, the following year score bugger all tries and win it all.

My main concern has been poor attack AND defence - at least in the last few matches we have been improving both

They are end of regular season try volumes but I was still wrong to post them so I have edited my post. The reason it was wrong to post is pre 2015 we placed 4 more games per season in the "regular" rounds. So you can't compare.

Doesn't alter the fact saying we are 2nd to Cas still means we are 30 tries down from them on the same number of games. Which sounds a lot worse than "second".

In fact in the regular rounds we were not 2nd but 3rd. Salford were second.

Over the last three seasons we have in fact been 30, 31 and 30 tries off the top try scoring side in the regular rounds. Remarkably consistent!

A better comparision pre super 8's is how far off the top we were:

2010 - 8
2011 - 39
2012 - we were top on 183
2013 - 7
2014 - we were top on 151

So apart form 2011 when Wire ran riot and scored 189 to our 150 we have been much closer or actually the top try scoring side than we have been these past 3 seasons.

[PaulC]

Cant disagree with that.

That said, short of the LLS, scoring a huge number of tries means nothing come final time.

Would be nice to see us flow well and score some sexy tries though, it gets rather dull watching the same thing week in week out.

Its all about results though I suppose and you look at the last few years and we haven't done too bad for silver ware. Take the Brain fart by flower and the shocking knock on by Sinfield that wasn't called and we would have 2 more Grand Finals to our name.

[DaveO]

Cant disagree with that.

That said, short of the LLS, scoring a huge number of tries means nothing come final time.

Would be nice to see us flow well and score some sexy tries though, it gets rather dull watching the same thing week in week out.

Its all about results though I suppose and you look at the last few years and we haven't done too bad for silver ware. Take the Brain fart by flower and the shocking knock on by Sinfield that wasn't called and we would have 2 more Grand Finals to our name.

It depends whether you see scoring tries in the regular season and so having a good attack as a strong indicator for your chances in the playoffs.

The fact we lost two GF's due to a brain fart and a missed decision is an argument that cuts both ways. On the day these are cup finals, one off games. A poor side can win if they raise their game for a one off final. So just like Wigan Athletic winning the FA cup and getting relegated HKR got to a final and followed suit (though obviously didn't win the cup).

I am not saying we are relegation fodder but even if we win v Hull and win the GF there will be too big an anomaly there for me to take the game as a whole seriously any more.

It's been said before the format of the competition means you only need turn up for the finals if clubs can play badly for 23 rounds, losing 10 games (drawing 3) and still win a GF.

There needs to be more correlation between the regular rounds form and eventual success or even the chance of it.

If we win either (or both) cups and someone posts it was a Wane master plan "pacing ourselves", I think will chuck something at the PC.

[cow yeds]

:eusa17: :eusa17:

[markill]

We don't rank as well in line breaks and tackle busts as we do in actual tries scored. I think that is a fact that supports what many people see from our attack not looking that good that often.

Hopefully the Salford performance lays the groundwork for the attack we'll see going forward to the end of the year and beyond. Breaks all across the field, variety of set plays and kicks, quick POTBs etc. was much more fun to watch than most games this year. Handily backed up by some defence too, when a good amount of our 'better' attacking performances were off the back of terrible defensive performances previously (e.g. Leigh & Hull away).

[5miler]

Solid performance 2 weeks ago in rotten conditions,way better performance last Friday in both attack and defence.both after a shocker at Leeds. Lost to Widnes last year with an awful performance then look what happened. Deja vue?