WiganWarriorsFans.com

East Stand Faithful wrote:I didnt want to talk about the WW but seen as you are all so sensitive I think we do have the most fickle fans in SL.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support the theory that Wigan fans are fickle. Wigan fans are as proud of their club as anyone and expect the players to be the same... If you want to see fickle fans have a look at how Bradfords crowds have dropped over the last few years... Ours have generally increased when performances haven't even though teams such as Bradford, Hull seem to be bringing less fans than ever. The notion of the Wigan walk is well and truly down to the fact that it rolls off the tongue has been said but if 10% of our fans leave early it looks more obvious because we have more than most to start with. We're not fickle we just dont want the players or the club to take us for granted and why should we?

slimshady wrote:

cpwigan wrote:

East Stand Faithful wrote:I dont understand why people are focussing on the Wigan walk (which was awful on Friday). My original point was that I orginally supported Nobby but have lost faith and dont like the style of rugby (five scoots and a kick) that he instils in the players.

Back to your original point. I have long held that view. Our game plan (we do have on, I think) is far too loose, simple and dependent upon individual players pulling off some fantastic feat of brilliance. SL is not the NRL but even so every player is fit, every player by and large can tackle. If you do not come up with methodical planned RL you will find it hard to beat anybody bar Salford and Celtic who will need 2009 to adjust.

The answer lies with top NRL coaches. Having an Australian accent does not = success. Kevin Walters is an example of that. If he had been a talented coach, Bennett would have kept him. However, the best NRL coaches are ahead of what British coaches can offer especially now SL has taken the decision to slow the game down and force teams to play RL rather than scoot into referee induced gaps. Matterson, Morgan Potter etc are now at an advantage over their British counterparts.

RL is the only sport where the referee controls the pace of the game.

CPW do you not think that no matter which coach was at the helm working with the same players the results would be the same? We have no direction on the field because we dont have any half backs, TL is not a scrumhalf and ST hasnt got enough experiance this coupled with a lightweight pack means we are bolloxed.

No. Huddersfield prove that the coach can make a huge difference. Robinson/Brown/Moore were all rubbished by all and sundry until Brown came and gave them a struture. If you think about anything in life, the less ability/the less experience you have the more you need a structure/guidelines. Many here will have worked with an apprentice or been an apprentice. Structure / guidelines get you through/allow you to survive. Sure the experienced employee can cope but even he once needed such structure / guidelines.

Trent showed that no matter how good he was, in modern RL you cannot win competitions without a structured plan / a detailed organised blue print.

If we do not have such a structured plan / detailed blue print then why have coaches? The game has evolved. I agree re Tommy as a halfback. However, a coach would recognise that he needs to create a plan whereby Tommy is running as much as possible at forwards in centre field especially at periods in the game when they are tiring. Scot Moore, Kevin Brown, Luke Robinson look like fairly decent halfbacks / hookers now but what are they doing? they are simply carrying out set plays that maximise their abilities. Whatsmore, the rest of the team known and understands what those set plays are and what they need to do similarly.

I have swiped the following from rlfans in its entirety as I thought it was a very telling set of statistics and worthy of a wider audience. It was posted by Wigan/Leeds Andy:

Given the current gloom and doom, I decided to put the info from Bilko's excellent archive into Excel and see what Noble's record is with Wigan. The following info is for the regular rounds only, the play-offs would add 4 more wins and two more defeats.

P80 W42 D4 L34 F1899 A1770 +129

Win % = 52.5

So basically since Noble has been in charge we've won just over half the games we've played.

Our win % in each of his seasons is:

2006 - 61.1%
2007 - 55.6%
2008 - 48.1%
2009 - 37.5%

It's not pretty reading and it shows we've regressed each year in terms of results, despite being able to get a couple of play-off wins to make it look respectable at the end of the season. It just confirms to me we give ourselves far too much to do at the "business end of the season", and while you win the comp in Sept and Oct, you can certainly give yourself too much to do to win it in Feb, Mar and Apr.

Not sure there is much point in looking at this years stats in the same context as complete seasons but regardless of that the 2009 stats are not good!

Note after the Les cats game Noble will have been here for three years.

The main conclusion from the statistics is that as I have been saying for a long time now, we have never matched the form of 2006 in 2007 and 2008.

It also proves to me that as I have also kept saying, we have gone backwards under Noble.

As Wigan/Leeds/Andy says they also show we leave ourselves with far too much to do in the playoffs and following on from that, it says to me that those people who point to those two wins in the playoffs in 2007 and 2008 as proving we are a top side are deluding themselves. As he says the playoff wins make it look respectable (when it clearly isn't IMO).

I dread to think what would have happened in 2007 and 2008 without Barrett. Unfortunately the way things are going and the fact our 37.5% win tally is against those perceived as weaker teams I have a horrible feeling we are going to find out in 2009.

Dave