A site for fans of Wigan Warriors RLFC. News, views, statistics, profiles and more all contributed by supporters of Wigan RL.
https://www.wiganwarriorsfans.com/
It was a brutal game at times and enjoyable but England's attack was poor even when close to the line.cpwigan wrote:Odd I watched a different game but hey life is opinions.
Two teams battled fantastically and were separated by a single try. For me, it reminded me of GB losing to Aus in the WC at Wembley by a single Renouf try.
I am mystified how any pack can be bullied in such a close game with a singly try. Both packs deserve the utmost praise and if I was one of those forwards I would royally peed off at such negative comments.
NZ had the better field position / possession which baffles me as to how anybody expects any half-back to dominate. My biggest criticism would the inability to target an injured NZ player out on the wing and that was on Widdops side N.B.
No to me it was a fantastic match. Uncompromising, never say die. A test match.
The Graham try could have been interesting had he scored it. You could say ah but NZ had one after (indeed they did) I am not sure if that NZ potential try would have come had Graham scored. If / but. A fantastic test match / series.
Good post Gimble, agreed!!thegimble wrote:Difference today was simple England was bullied down the middle and Williams was poor if that was Matty Smith a 10 page thread would have been up by now. New Zealand pack did not get moved around enough. Given how poor England were NZ created 1 try through luck and skill at the same time. If Graham got a bit of luck than that game is a draw. That was poor by England nothing special from NZ.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:What are your views now Gimble?thegimble wrote: Weakened NZ team is a bit of an exscuse. England were missing 2 Burgess with Sam coming back and a certaim full back.
England also were bedding in a new pairing at 6 and 7. Difference is fitness NZ looked gone at 60. Sign of the changes in the game. Previously GB or England were tired at that point.
Apart from off loads NZ looked poor. 2nd half was as good of an international display as you will see by a young side who will get better.
As for MM he can defend but so can Roby and both Hodgson and Roby offer more in attack. But as I said before I would just run with Roby.
I would put Hardaker at centre move Bateman to the bench and go with Roby for 80.
But as I said if England had the 2 Sam's would have won the game. Hardaker is truly awful FB as an attacking force at that level.
As for the fitness levels if England move the ball around and move the pack around NZ will go as they did last week. As for NZ missing players would be the same given the importance SB and ST is to England. Johnson is a very good player and they miss him.
No its not mental its quality in certain areas of the field. Luck could help but a full DW next week I still believe England will win.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Good post Gimble, agreed!!thegimble wrote:Difference today was simple England was bullied down the middle and Williams was poor if that was Matty Smith a 10 page thread would have been up by now. New Zealand pack did not get moved around enough. Given how poor England were NZ created 1 try through luck and skill at the same time. If Graham got a bit of luck than that game is a draw. That was poor by England nothing special from NZ.TrueBlueWarrior wrote: What are your views now Gimble?
As for MM he can defend but so can Roby and both Hodgson and Roby offer more in attack. But as I said before I would just run with Roby.
I would put Hardaker at centre move Bateman to the bench and go with Roby for 80.
But as I said if England had the 2 Sam's would have won the game. Hardaker is truly awful FB as an attacking force at that level.
As for the fitness levels if England move the ball around and move the pack around NZ will go as they did last week. As for NZ missing players would be the same given the importance SB and ST is to England. Johnson is a very good player and they miss him.
Do you not think that England have more of a mental issue than physical when it comes to beating the top 2 nations? As in when we get close we always seem to bottle it! The longer it goes without a test series win or major trophy win, the worse it will get! Next weeks game isn't only important for this series but for me it could be make a break and set the tone for the next 5-10 years!!
I think it was a combination of steadfast defence and both teams then being tired when they had the ball and lacking the cutting edge. Nevertheless, 1 try, fantastic effort by both teams. IMO today was a far higher standard than our GF defeat.thegimble wrote:It was a brutal game at times and enjoyable but England's attack was poor even when close to the line.cpwigan wrote:Odd I watched a different game but hey life is opinions.
Two teams battled fantastically and were separated by a single try. For me, it reminded me of GB losing to Aus in the WC at Wembley by a single Renouf try.
I am mystified how any pack can be bullied in such a close game with a singly try. Both packs deserve the utmost praise and if I was one of those forwards I would royally peed off at such negative comments.
NZ had the better field position / possession which baffles me as to how anybody expects any half-back to dominate. My biggest criticism would the inability to target an injured NZ player out on the wing and that was on Widdops side N.B.
No to me it was a fantastic match. Uncompromising, never say die. A test match.
The Graham try could have been interesting had he scored it. You could say ah but NZ had one after (indeed they did) I am not sure if that NZ potential try would have come had Graham scored. If / but. A fantastic test match / series.
I agree about not targeting the player with cramp. If that went in an one on one tackle with Hall then anything would be possible.
1 Try! inches/ what ifs/ maybes. No mental issue just two incredibly well matched teams.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Good post Gimble, agreed!!thegimble wrote:Difference today was simple England was bullied down the middle and Williams was poor if that was Matty Smith a 10 page thread would have been up by now. New Zealand pack did not get moved around enough. Given how poor England were NZ created 1 try through luck and skill at the same time. If Graham got a bit of luck than that game is a draw. That was poor by England nothing special from NZ.TrueBlueWarrior wrote: What are your views now Gimble?
As for MM he can defend but so can Roby and both Hodgson and Roby offer more in attack. But as I said before I would just run with Roby.
I would put Hardaker at centre move Bateman to the bench and go with Roby for 80.
But as I said if England had the 2 Sam's would have won the game. Hardaker is truly awful FB as an attacking force at that level.
As for the fitness levels if England move the ball around and move the pack around NZ will go as they did last week. As for NZ missing players would be the same given the importance SB and ST is to England. Johnson is a very good player and they miss him.
Do you not think that England have more of a mental issue than physical when it comes to beating the top 2 nations? As in when we get close we always seem to bottle it! The longer it goes without a test series win or major trophy win, the worse it will get! Next weeks game isn't only important for this series but for me it could be make a break and set the tone for the next 5-10 years!!
But we are always on the wrong end of them inches, tries, what ifs, maybes etc. We haven't won a test series for 8 years, I just don't think it's all down to ability although we lack it at times, I think we lack mental toughness at times! I don't mean enthusiasm, desire, physical toughness etc. I mean mental toughness regarding decisions, unforced errors etc. It's been to long since we beat them, let's hope that changes next week!!cpwigan wrote:1 Try! inches/ what ifs/ maybes. No mental issue just two incredibly well matched teams.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Good post Gimble, agreed!!thegimble wrote: Difference today was simple England was bullied down the middle and Williams was poor if that was Matty Smith a 10 page thread would have been up by now. New Zealand pack did not get moved around enough. Given how poor England were NZ created 1 try through luck and skill at the same time. If Graham got a bit of luck than that game is a draw. That was poor by England nothing special from NZ.
As for MM he can defend but so can Roby and both Hodgson and Roby offer more in attack. But as I said before I would just run with Roby.
I would put Hardaker at centre move Bateman to the bench and go with Roby for 80.
But as I said if England had the 2 Sam's would have won the game. Hardaker is truly awful FB as an attacking force at that level.
As for the fitness levels if England move the ball around and move the pack around NZ will go as they did last week. As for NZ missing players would be the same given the importance SB and ST is to England. Johnson is a very good player and they miss him.
Do you not think that England have more of a mental issue than physical when it comes to beating the top 2 nations? As in when we get close we always seem to bottle it! The longer it goes without a test series win or major trophy win, the worse it will get! Next weeks game isn't only important for this series but for me it could be make a break and set the tone for the next 5-10 years!!
If Wigan played liked England did today they would win 99.9% of their games.
