WiganWarriorsFans.com

Any teams that walk on the pitch could of won, strange comment to me that.

cpwigan wrote:

AdamMac wrote:

cpwigan wrote: John DORAHAY

Ha come on pal. Fairs fair.

Saturday made those last few weeks all worth it. I, as the rest of us were gutted walking away from the cas, saints, hudds games but id of taken those defeats all day long if it guaranteed a wembley win.

IMO we beat hull at their own game on Saturday, very impressive.

Looking forward to the play offs now

Fairs fair you OK say if we play as we did at Wembley do you think we can win the GF playing to that standard?

I will lay my cards on the table NO! Hull were dreadful in possession and YET could have won a game they logically had no right to win. 50% completion = a loss v every team in SL YET, Hull nearly won.

FWIW, I think Andy Farrell was very important in our victory.

IMO we beat Hull at their own game, they play a very disciplined game that use pretty much 3 or 4 drives and a good kick from Holdsworth. However, they clearly dropped to much ball and couldn't make the meters down the middle. I think there was an interesting stat on how we made over 400 meters more than them on the first 3 carries. They employed a rush defence on the edges as teams generally do now against our attack but instead of still trying to through the ball out and playing risky we took it up the middle and smith did the rest.

I was really pleased with how we dealt with the conditions and Hulls tactics as to me it showed we have got a plan B.

Every credit to Shaun Wane, his coaching staff and wigan warriors.

Kittwazzer wrote:

cpwigan wrote:

Kittwazzer wrote:Hull nearly won? They didn't even nearly score!

We watched a different game

Same game, different eyes. I was enjoying seeing my team winning the cup, you were looking for anything to back up your Dorahy comparison. It wasn't there. Get over it!

Not at all but we did a different game

? to you and all; if Hull had sneaked a victory in 1985 would you still have enjoyed the game?

cpwigan wrote:

Kittwazzer wrote:

cpwigan wrote: We watched a different game

Same game, different eyes. I was enjoying seeing my team winning the cup, you were looking for anything to back up your Dorahy comparison. It wasn't there. Get over it!

Not at all but we did a different game

? to you and all; if Hull had sneaked a victory in 1985 would you still have enjoyed the game?

5 more minutes and they would have done. Obviously 28-30 would have left me feeling deflated but yes, I'd have enjoyed the game, just not the result.

As I enjoyed the game the year before!

cpwigan wrote:

Kittwazzer wrote:

cpwigan wrote: We watched a different game

Same game, different eyes. I was enjoying seeing my team winning the cup, you were looking for anything to back up your Dorahy comparison. It wasn't there. Get over it!

Not at all but we did a different game

? to you and all; if Hull had sneaked a victory in 1985 would you still have enjoyed the game?

I went in 1984 and 1985 and of course back then we had not been dominant so had no expectations other than hoping we might win.

I was gutted in 1984 and deliriously happy in 1985.

Strange thing is in 1985 I vividly recall that during the game I never felt we could lose even though Hull made a come back. If you ever watch the highlights this was madness on my part because close to the death they had a break and the winger was only just stopped and had he not been - game over.

Not sure if this answers your question.

Are you implying because we won we are overlooking the flaws in Wigan's play?

If so I am not. I have already said I thought our attack was poor and we will need to score more than 16 to progress to and win a GF.

However there were other aspects to our play in the final that were an improvement over how we have played of late that would help us on that quest.

Our defence was rock solid and it hasn't been lately (defence wins matches) and our kicking game of real quality appeared from nowhere.

I see Green has been saying this:

Smith and Green Answer critics

and while I am happy to give credit where it is due and highlight how good a kicking game we had in the final this has got to be more than a one off before he can say that and I think the same is true with Wane. He got the tactics right in the rain but he needs to show he can do it again in the play offs, wet or dry.

We probably won't need more than 16 points to win the GF if history is any guide.

Exiled Wiganer wrote:We probably won't need more than 16 points to win the GF if history is any guide.

How do you work that out?

Of the 15 grand finals so far only three have been won by a side scoring less than 16. 12 of the previous winners scored 16 or more points.

The teams who lost those games definitely needed to have scored 17 or more to win.

We also scored 16 when we lost to Saints in 2000!

DaveO wrote:

Exiled Wiganer wrote:We probably won't need more than 16 points to win the GF if history is any guide.

How do you work that out?

Of the 15 grand finals so far only three have been won by a side scoring less than 16. 12 of the previous winners scored 16 or more points.

The teams who lost those games definitely needed to have scored 17 or more to win.

We also scored 16 when we lost to Saints in 2000!

Flipping eck Dave, why'd you have to bring that up?