DaveO wrote:I don't think anyone would have kicked the one at the end. Not because it was on the touch line as such but because with it being so far back that made the distance a lot further. I think he'd have got a conversion form the touchlineas that would have been closer has one of them involved scored in the corner.
Maybe a player with Faz's power would have stood a better chance but another of our great goal kickers, Frano Botica, would never have got the ball anywhere near close enough.
Anyway focusing on the goal kicking takes the heat out of the fact Leeds won by professional fouls (two of 'em).
Dave
I am old enough to remember that the year we finished top after only losing two matches (both against the Wire!!) we lost both matches because Frano had two off days with the boot.
Which season was this?
The only season Wigan won every league game bar two defeats to Warrington was the 1986/87 season (I remember it too).... and you are right, Frano's kicking was awful for Wigan (seeing as he hadn't even signed for the club at that time )
In a tight game we committed the cardinal sin - we should have kicked at goal in the first half when Buderus upended Prescott. It was an easy kick directly in front of the sticks, we were leading by 2 points but Leeds had the momentum. It would have allowed us to regroup and in hindsight it would have meant that a drop goal would have been insufficient for Leeds to win the game.
Only the coach and captain can tell us why we didn't take the opportunity and why we then decided to take on more difficult kicks after half-time!
Winning is down to 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration - Shaun Edwards
ancientnloyal wrote:Sorry to say but it showed tonight and last week... Hope it is right next week
Obviously he couldn't in this particular match but overall I think he responds to pressure better than most. Just hope the misses don't mess with his head too much, especially with it looking like Deacon will miss the HKR game.
shaunedwardsfanclub wrote:In a tight game we committed the cardinal sin - we should have kicked at goal in the first half when Buderus upended Prescott. It was an easy kick directly in front of the sticks, we were leading by 2 points but Leeds had the momentum. It would have allowed us to regroup and in hindsight it would have meant that a drop goal would have been insufficient for Leeds to win the game.
Only the coach and captain can tell us why we didn't take the opportunity and why we then decided to take on more difficult kicks after half-time!
We didn't take the kick at goal because we were already 2 points ahead and in the grand scheme of things being 4 points ahead wasn't going to help us that much either. We were never going to win the game by goal kicks and that'# the mistake we made in the Challenge Cup, just kicking and not taking a risk which would win us the game.
We needed tries, not goal kicks, so when Leeds were having pressure it made more sense to try to create a bit of pressure on them, rather than taking 2 points and having to work our way back up the field again. I don't think the 2 points at that moment in time were definitely worth the loss of field position.
It's alright thinking how can I say we shouldn't have taken the 2 points when we only lost by 1 point but the simple fact is had we taken the 2 the rest of the game would have completely changed.
It isn't as if we would take the 2 and then the game would just play itself out in the same way that it did. It would have been a completely different scenario.
It's just like the people who were trying to blame Joel Tomkins for the loss because of the penalty he gave away. They say it cost us the game because we lost by just a point but it's ridiculous. It would have been a completely different game and no one knows what would have happened, but it's almost certain that the game would not have played out in the same way.
The best way to win a game is in hindsight. The worst things we as fans can do is start thinking that if such a thing had happened differently that the game would have still panned out in the same way but with a different scoreline.
What's done is done and it was the team who lost the game over the course of 80 minutes. When dissecting the game it makes a lot more sense to talk about what did happen rather than what might have happened had something else been different.
Totally agree cherry :eusa2:
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage. #18thMan
shaunedwardsfanclub wrote:In a tight game we committed the cardinal sin - we should have kicked at goal in the first half when Buderus upended Prescott. It was an easy kick directly in front of the sticks, we were leading by 2 points but Leeds had the momentum. It would have allowed us to regroup and in hindsight it would have meant that a drop goal would have been insufficient for Leeds to win the game.
Only the coach and captain can tell us why we didn't take the opportunity and why we then decided to take on more difficult kicks after half-time!
We didn't take the kick at goal because we were already 2 points ahead and in the grand scheme of things being 4 points ahead wasn't going to help us that much either. We were never going to win the game by goal kicks and that'# the mistake we made in the Challenge Cup, just kicking and not taking a risk which would win us the game.
We needed tries, not goal kicks, so when Leeds were having pressure it made more sense to try to create a bit of pressure on them, rather than taking 2 points and having to work our way back up the field again. I don't think the 2 points at that moment in time were definitely worth the loss of field position.
My point is not about winning or losing a match by not taking a goal kick it is about changing the momentum of the game. Instead of slowing the game down and taking the sting out of Leeds we decided to drive the ball in for two tackles and then put in an aimless crossfield kick. You say that we were never going to win the game with kicks - well Leeds did! The mistake we made in the Challenge Cup was nothing to do with kicking penalties - the loss came as a result of us not maintaining field position (charged down kick,)a missed tackle and our failure to take our chances. On Sunday we did take a risk and lost.
It's alright thinking how can I say we shouldn't have taken the 2 points when we only lost by 1 point but the simple fact is had we taken the 2 the rest of the game would have completely changed.
It isn't as if we would take the 2 and then the game would just play itself out in the same way that it did. It would have been a completely different scenario.
Agreed. We should have changed the game completely.
It's just like the people who were trying to blame Joel Tomkins for the loss because of the penalty he gave away. They say it cost us the game because we lost by just a point but it's ridiculous. It would have been a completely different game and no one knows what would have happened, but it's almost certain that the game would not have played out in the same way.
I am not blaming any individual for our loss, after all it is a team sport. I am pointing out that we changed our strategy/tactics after the interval! Yes we do need to improve our discipline (Joel et al), we need to defend better (as per our early season form)and we need to keep our composure.
The best way to win a game is in hindsight. The worst things we as fans can do is start thinking that if such a thing had happened differently that the game would have still panned out in the same way but with a different scoreline.
The best way to win a game is not hindsight. The best way to correct your errors and improve your performance is hindsight. I am not suggesting that we would have won the game had Pat kicked the first penalty I am asking why we decided to kick at goal in the second half after we turned down an easier opportunity earlier on. If our game plan was to maintain field position and keep pressure on Leeds, as you suggest that we should have done, then why did we not kick to touch?
What's done is done and it was the team who lost the game over the course of 80 minutes. When dissecting the game it makes a lot more sense to talk about what did happen rather than what might have happened had something else been different.
I totally agree it is no use crying over spilt milk. I am sure that the coaching staff and players will have rectified a few issues for Friady when hopefully, we will beat HKR. We are then relying on our great rivals sending us to Headingley so that we can extract revenge over Leeds. What did happen though is that we made some bad choices and made too many errors. In tight games you need to take every point you can get and then hope it is good enough to win.
Winning is down to 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration - Shaun Edwards
cpwigan wrote:Not sure if seconds were still available BUT I wonder if we would have been better kicking to touch and going for a drop from the last play of the game?
Leeds should have had 2 players in the bin for professional fouls so it would have been Golden Point 13 v 11
A red herring there CP, if we kicked into touch from the penalty with 5 seconds left play would only finish after we had tapped the ball opposite where the ball went into touch and the ball became dead again. We could have done as you suggest, similar in some ways to Phil Clarkes repeated idea about ignoring a conversion kick after a penalty when you still need to score another try to win
Regarder une fille en bikini, c'est comme avoir un revolver chargé sur sa table:
Il n'y a rien de mal a ça mais il est difficile de penser à autre chose.
cpwigan wrote:Not sure if seconds were still available BUT I wonder if we would have been better kicking to touch and going for a drop from the last play of the game?
Leeds should have had 2 players in the bin for professional fouls so it would have been Golden Point 13 v 11
A red herring there CP, if we kicked into touch from the penalty with 5 seconds left play would only finish after we had tapped the ball opposite where the ball went into touch and the ball became dead again. We could have done as you suggest, similar in some ways to Phil Clarkes repeated idea about ignoring a conversion kick after a try when you still need to score another try to win
Regarder une fille en bikini, c'est comme avoir un revolver chargé sur sa table:
Il n'y a rien de mal a ça mais il est difficile de penser à autre chose.
In games like play-off's etc IMO all opportunities for points should be taken.There was a chance of 2 points for a penalty
not taken Madges call chose to run it.He will have to go for points tonight.
)
