WiganWarriorsFans.com

Caboosegg wrote:For such a rubbish hooked he leave a noticeable absence when Powell is subbed on. So he obviously does somthing well.

Does he really?

nathan_rugby wrote:

Caboosegg wrote:For such a rubbish hooked he leave a noticeable absence when Powell is subbed on. So he obviously does somthing well.

Does he really?

He certainly does it better than Powell.

Personally I think Daryl Clarke is better than Hodgson. I think he was probably right not to select Clarke as he did have a quiet year but then again so did Ferres through no fault of his own but im sure as glad he selected him what an impact he makes in an England shirt. I can't remember him having a bad game since he was given a jersey, it just go's to show what a player can prove in a good team.

I think Hodgson was / is under rated. IMO, he was the right selection on this occasion over Mac. Starting him and Roby on the bench as a bold call. I did not envisage it and probably would not have done so but IMO McNamara got much more right than wrong and it was possibly his finest day as GB/England coach.

I stand by Mac was much more capable than the Mac we saw in 2015. Hookers have to be a playmaker and extra kicker. Great tough defence whilst vital is not enough.

At this present time; Mac does not warrant the GB/England 9 spot.

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

thegimble wrote:

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.

Why are you suggesting I am making an excuse? Was it NZ strongest team? No! They were missing far more key players than we were, so as I said it was a weakened NZ team.

Sam Tomkins would improve us in my opinion but no where near as much as their missing players would for them. Sam Burgess currently plays a different sport so he doesn't count otherwise they were missing SBW as well!!

You are also making my point for me, NZ did tire and looked poor at times but back in their own yard with all their players fit would they then? or in a World Cup final? No chance, that is why for me MM would be priceless in our defensive line rather than Hodgson.

Will NZ not get better?

Difference is SBW is not reyurning to league from what i can gather.

And Burgess will be a bigger gain for England as will Sam Tomkins as full back.

Regardless of where the game is played England now are as fit as Aus or NZ. Weyher they played in NZ or Dubai they were gone.

Is this forum once again looking at a Wigan player not in the England side and people having a whinge. Last night showed Toby is by far the best hooker in SL and McNamara needs to do whay Wane also needs to play his hooker for 80.

Mm did go backwards this year. i don't know if he was carrying an injury or not

I think like to think we went off the rails when he came on because there is is a general perception that Sam Powell is poor. Looking back on the matches there was a few occasions we actually picked up when mm went off, not every match but sometimes.

I don't rate Powell but I do think mm was far from as good as he can be, his defence will always pull him out the fire when it comes to performances but roby while not smashing attackers is just as effective in defence and way more potent at the moment in attack

thegimble wrote:

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

thegimble wrote: 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.

Why are you suggesting I am making an excuse? Was it NZ strongest team? No! They were missing far more key players than we were, so as I said it was a weakened NZ team.

Sam Tomkins would improve us in my opinion but no where near as much as their missing players would for them. Sam Burgess currently plays a different sport so he doesn't count otherwise they were missing SBW as well!!

You are also making my point for me, NZ did tire and looked poor at times but back in their own yard with all their players fit would they then? or in a World Cup final? No chance, that is why for me MM would be priceless in our defensive line rather than Hodgson.

Will NZ not get better?

Difference is SBW is not reyurning to league from what i can gather.

And Burgess will be a bigger gain for England as will Sam Tomkins as full back.

Regardless of where the game is played England now are as fit as Aus or NZ. Weyher they played in NZ or Dubai they were gone.

Is this forum once again looking at a Wigan player not in the England side and people having a whinge. Last night showed Toby is by far the best hooker in SL and McNamara needs to do whay Wane also needs to play his hooker for 80.

So you know for sure that SBW is not returning to league and Burgess definitely is? Any other facts for us?

I agree Tomkins will be a gain for us as will Burgess if he changes sport but their players they had missing will be a far far far bigger gain for them and to try and argue that is a tad silly in my opinion!!

Regardless of where the game is played? Yes we looked fitter on this occasion but I wouldn't be making sweeping statements on the fitness of us compared to them and the Aussies just yet! At least wait till we are consistently competitive with them when all teams are at full strength or there or thereabouts anyway! Also home advantage doesn't make a difference? Think you need to look at Wigan's home and away record for last year and Catalans for that matter!!

When did I whinge because MM wasn't in the England squad? I agree on form he shouldn't be! I was making the point that a full strength NZ which they are currently not would obviously give us a much tougher test and that is where in my opinion we would need MM over Hodgson! Roby should always play, again I don't recall saying he shouldn't!

For what ever reason MM was off the pace last season.

McNamara isn't a good coach but on this occasion he got it right with JH and Roby. The Kiwis knew what they were facing with Hodgson, as often as they may have faced Roby they won't be as familiar with him as JH being in the NRL.

I'm still pretty convinced the game changer was the "try" disallowed for obstruction on Williams. Had the Kiwis scored and gone two scores ahead then I think it would have been them who would have won.

As for the reason MM was not his usual self I don't know. I do hope he improves next year as he's just signed a new four year deal. As to the Wigan wobble when he goes off well that's really up for a debate.
I've mentioned my thoughts previously that a man off the bench cold and going into dummy half hasn't worked for us. We've lost all but two going with that interchage. We should use a man to replace MM who started the match and is up with the pace of the game. We won all three where that was tried.

I do think MM will have to up his game next year to get his International shirt back. Hodgson has an advantage in the NRL and Roby was excellent again.
Roby in a way is a bit like Hall. They can often look mediocre in SL but pull on that England shirt and they really raise their game.

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

thegimble wrote:

TrueBlueWarrior wrote: Why are you suggesting I am making an excuse? Was it NZ strongest team? No! They were missing far more key players than we were, so as I said it was a weakened NZ team.

Sam Tomkins would improve us in my opinion but no where near as much as their missing players would for them. Sam Burgess currently plays a different sport so he doesn't count otherwise they were missing SBW as well!!

You are also making my point for me, NZ did tire and looked poor at times but back in their own yard with all their players fit would they then? or in a World Cup final? No chance, that is why for me MM would be priceless in our defensive line rather than Hodgson.

Will NZ not get better?

Difference is SBW is not reyurning to league from what i can gather.

And Burgess will be a bigger gain for England as will Sam Tomkins as full back.

Regardless of where the game is played England now are as fit as Aus or NZ. Weyher they played in NZ or Dubai they were gone.

Is this forum once again looking at a Wigan player not in the England side and people having a whinge. Last night showed Toby is by far the best hooker in SL and McNamara needs to do whay Wane also needs to play his hooker for 80.

So you know for sure that SBW is not returning to league and Burgess definitely is? Any other facts for us?

I agree Tomkins will be a gain for us as will Burgess if he changes sport but their players they had missing will be a far far far bigger gain for them and to try and argue that is a tad silly in my opinion!!

Regardless of where the game is played? Yes we looked fitter on this occasion but I wouldn't be making sweeping statements on the fitness of us compared to them and the Aussies just yet! At least wait till we are consistently competitive with them when all teams are at full strength or there or thereabouts anyway! Also home advantage doesn't make a difference? Think you need to look at Wigan's home and away record for last year and Catalans for that matter!!

When did I whinge because MM wasn't in the England squad? I agree on form he shouldn't be! I was making the point that a full strength NZ which they are currently not would obviously give us a much tougher test and that is where in my opinion we would need MM over Hodgson! Roby should always play, again I don't recall saying he shouldn't!

SBW is now first choice centre if Nonu retires from International and at his age he will I think. Sam Burgess will not stay in union most know that. Even his brother has hinted.

As for home form never mentioned form I mentioned fitness. No matter where that game was played NZ fitness compared to England was shocking. When did England last beat NZ or Australia and looked fresher ending the game. Most of the NZ players are from the NRL so you would have excepted it the other way round.

Roby should play 80 minutes. Ironically I am not English do not give a monkey in any sport apart from League what you lot do. But looking at the results over the last 2-3 years you got to admit England look like giving any pack even Australia a run for its money. If Burgess returns England have a sniff in 2017. That side should develop and improve. And England have the best props in the game atm.

Not saying England will win it but they now have the potential to give Australia and NZ a challenge. 5-6 years ago they would have been hammered.

As for full NZ side against an English side with Sam T and Sam B 50/50 game.

NZ lacked a half back threat IMO. However, they have a very dangerous halfback who is sadly injured. Nevertheless, England played well IMO and showed guts torecover from a poor start.