WiganWarriorsFans.com

I commented in the first half that at points we look very slow in attack and this is when we seem to make mistakes. Then about two minutes later we get on a good roll and force a drop out.
In the second half we seemed to be playing fast flowing open rugby league which worked. Why do we always seem as though we cant be bothered in the first half?

TWO EYED WARRIOR posted:

cpwigan posted:
Strewth we were poor with the ball for large periods. Did we not have 2 weeks to train? :conf: Thank heaven for Trent (pure class). Interestingly, Lockers looked very good as a playmaker / passer as the match went on. Tommy Lu Lu seems to struggle to create play. It may be that we use him more to run and rely on Trent and Lockers for passing. Higham made a huge difference and didn't the fans let Nobby know about it

Trent, Higham, Lockers, Feka, Richards, Calderwood shone. Fielden is still stealing money. Goulding did well to set up one try and should have had one himself had Hill not been greedy and bombed it. On the negative, Goulding made a mistake when we were down to 11 men.

Overall the two teams looked pretty clueless IMO,Wigan started excellent and everybody was thinking Millard to take us to the GF!

Then the first half wheels came off there was no way we should have gone of that pitch at half time behind on the scoreboard, even though we look clueless at times we where 20 points better than salford and the winning margin should have been a lot more.

The 2nd half performnce painted over the obvious cracks in the team.

Then the 6 pints of fosters kicked in and i went with the flow.

A win is win i suppose

That's the best you can say for it.

If we're honest, it was a case of the crapper team losing rather than the better team winning.

Sure we put some decent moves together in the second half, but that was largely because Salford had given up. In the first half, when it was still a tussle, we looked distinctly second best.

I don't see how anyone can describe Feka as 'awesome'. He got caught out time and again in defence, and at one point - after he'd made a couple of bursts - looked as though he was actually asking the bench if he could come off. Embarrassing.

Another one I'm starting to have second thoughts about is Goulding. No doubt this is one of the club's youngsters who are always telling everyone that they're worth a lot more money. Well I'm not sure Goulding is. He ran a decent line at the end, but that was when the game was over. Earlier, when it was still in the balance, he made one of the most pathetic errors I've ever seen from a professional player - diving for a ball that was rolling towards him. What does he think he is, a goalkeeper? We were down two men and there was only a couple of minutes to go to the whistle, so at a time when we should have played a conservative, tightly defensive game, he contrives to gift Salford possession right on our line - and the next thing, they score and are back in it. He needs to improve enormously if he wants a first team jersey next year.

As for the rest: Richards - solid, but uninspiring when returning the ball; Calderwood - good, worked his guts out again; Bailey - made another hatful of errors; DV - crap; Colbon - ordinary; TL - tried hard but simply not creative enough (a familiar story in this current era of naff Wigan scrum-halfs); Fielden - again doing the tackling of two men, his own and Feka's; Millard - one moment of magic, for the rest anonymous; Higham - far better than Millard and again, bewilderingly, subbed after only a short stint; Fletch - put in a big workload; Hansen - tried and looked occasionally dangerous; Lockers - played in flashes.

Again, not much to write home about. If we don't improve markedly, both Hull KR and St Helens will kill us.

What worrys me and gives me nagging doubts about Nobby is what we do with ball in hand. The whole structure is wrong. Basics RL fundamental is that you go forward before you go wide. So, it is illogical for everybody to fan out wide from tackle 1. The forwards should be grouped around the play of the ball, offering decoys, simply pushing up with the ball carrier to take 'heat' off him. There's no ploys for the hard yards. Our sum ploy is make it obvious that the poor numpty stood on his own is going to get the ball and hope he creates a miracle. The other ploy is then pass it wide v a set defence and pray that Trent conjures up a miracle v a defence that has not been pressurised by busts up the middle. To sum it up, our attacking system is the stuff that you would see in the amateurs, maybe worse. It is totally dependent on individuals pulling rabbits out of hats.

cpwigan posted:
What worrys me and gives me nagging doubts about Nobby is what we do with ball in hand. The whole structure is wrong. Basics RL fundamental is that you go forward before you go wide. So, it is illogical for everybody to fan out wide from tackle 1. The forwards should be grouped around the play of the ball, offering decoys, simply pushing up with the ball carrier to take 'heat' off him. There's no ploys for the hard yards. Our sum ploy is make it obvious that the poor numpty stood on his own is going to get the ball and hope he creates a miracle. The other ploy is then pass it wide v a set defence and pray that Trent conjures up a miracle v a defence that has not been pressurised by busts up the middle. To sum it up, our attacking system is the stuff that you would see in the amateurs, maybe worse. It is totally dependent on individuals pulling rabbits out of hats.

Sorry but you don't half make yourself look stupid when you post stuff like this. Do you actually think you know more about the game than Nobby?

cpwigan posted:
What worrys me and gives me nagging doubts about Nobby is what we do with ball in hand. The whole structure is wrong. Basics RL fundamental is that you go forward before you go wide. So, it is illogical for everybody to fan out wide from tackle 1. The forwards should be grouped around the play of the ball, offering decoys, simply pushing up with the ball carrier to take 'heat' off him. There's no ploys for the hard yards. Our sum ploy is make it obvious that the poor numpty stood on his own is going to get the ball and hope he creates a miracle. The other ploy is then pass it wide v a set defence and pray that Trent conjures up a miracle v a defence that has not been pressurised by busts up the middle. To sum it up, our attacking system is the stuff that you would see in the amateurs, maybe worse. It is totally dependent on individuals pulling rabbits out of hats.

There are times when Noble's tactics are questionable. But Noble isn't continually dropping the ball, giving away penalties and standing off in the tackle.

In the first half on Friday night we rarely got into Salford's half, and whenever we did we blew it within two or three tackles.

You'll never build the attacking momentum you need, if you can't complete your sets of six. This season, I've lost count of the number of times we've knocked on either straight after earning a penalty or straight from the kick-off.

Presumably, Noble's game-plans are based around us having at least an equal amount of possession and territory. It must be as frustrating to him as it is to us, when he sees us constantly gifting that to the opposition.

Once again the opposition were faster than us and looked more danderous with the ball in their hands, our plays relied on Barrets kicking game which was excellent.
I have noticed that the majority of people who post on here do not like Higham or Calderwood, if the other 16 in the squad had their enthusiasm we would be a much better team. Calderwood will score tries if given the right ball, he is not like Big Les who can power his way over and he needs a good centre but his defence is tremendous.
The other players, well Millard had his best game for us but Higham outclassed him and should not have been taken off in the second half, Colburn is not good enough and I say it again I do not think Fielden wants to be at Wigan, his heart is not in it when he pulls on the cherry and white. We should also realise that Lockers is a very average player and if he had come for a big fee from Auss instead of through the academy we would be more critical of him.
Nobby has no idea whatsoever about substitutions, in fact his team selection is also off, he has not picked McIlorum since he was third in the fans favourite for July but he keeps picking Millard and starting him when it is clear Higham is much better.
I really hope we have not signed Colley he will not improve us

cpwigan posted:
What worrys me and gives me nagging doubts about Nobby is what we do with ball in hand. The whole structure is wrong. Basics RL fundamental is that you go forward before you go wide. So, it is illogical for everybody to fan out wide from tackle 1. The forwards should be grouped around the play of the ball, offering decoys, simply pushing up with the ball carrier to take 'heat' off him. There's no ploys for the hard yards. Our sum ploy is make it obvious that the poor numpty stood on his own is going to get the ball and hope he creates a miracle. The other ploy is then pass it wide v a set defence and pray that Trent conjures up a miracle v a defence that has not been pressurised by busts up the middle. To sum it up, our attacking system is the stuff that you would see in the amateurs, maybe worse. It is totally dependent on individuals pulling rabbits out of hats.

i can see where you are coming from CP , with a couple of big props we could establish a bit of go forward down the middle and this would let us develope a more varied attack

Jimmy I would never presume to know more than Nobby or any other professional for that matter. However, I do know the difference between quality attack and poor attack. As does everybody else who watches Saints, Bradford, Leeds and then Wigan.

An easy observation, Saints and Bradford both push up very flat on a short blind side. It pressures the defence even if the ball does not go that way. Do we? No