WiganWarriorsFans.com

mike binder wrote:

exile in Tiger country wrote:

cpwigan wrote: The players are not happy with Wanes defensive ideas. Westand Rich tried to make you all aware of that daysd ago but you all ignored his post.

However, the best line defence is to play in the opposition 20.

.

I wholeheatedly agree, but there is little point in defending like a mother bear protecting her cub in their half, if we give up when on our line and the opposition have a chance to put points on the board.

goal line defence was woefull, didnt they score t
2 out wide and 1 intercetion ?? dont remember them scrambling any over ????

Apart from the interception try, they were scored from POTB close to our line, so that is goal line defence. Out wide makes no difference, it's still the same line.
And the reasons the comments are similar to the Noble era is obvious. The rugby is similar and the banal excuses and trite comments from the coach are all too similar.

exile in Tiger country wrote:

mike binder wrote:

exile in Tiger country wrote: I wholeheatedly agree, but there is little point in defending like a mother bear protecting her cub in their half, if we give up when on our line and the opposition have a chance to put points on the board.

goal line defence was woefull, didnt they score t
2 out wide and 1 intercetion ?? dont remember them scrambling any over ????

Apart from the interception try, they were scored from POTB close to our line, so that is goal line defence. Out wide makes no difference, it's still the same line.
And the reasons the comments are similar to the Noble era is obvious. The rugby is similar and the banal excuses and trite comments from the coach are all too similar.

What Exile said :eusa2: