WiganWarriorsFans.com

cpwigan wrote:

the_Warrior_in_ Brum wrote: Daniel Anderson made a huge difference to Saints

I forgot Saints had been winning for 10 years previous to this!

Noble inherits a winning team at Bradford (and continues to win for 4 years) and Daniel Anderson has done something different?

Doveoverdave wrote:

cpwigan wrote:

the_Warrior_in_ Brum wrote: Daniel Anderson made a huge difference to Saints

I forgot Saints had been winning for 10 years previous to this!

Noble inherits a winning team at Bradford (and continues to win for 4 years) and Daniel Anderson has done something different?

Hard to debate with you DOD

From top to bottom Anderson has made a huge difference. He has taken Saints to another level. One where the system of play is almost more important than the players selected. They use the same system from Academy upwards and have overcome injuries, they have let players go due to the cap, they will continue to let senior players go. They will continue to have success. He leaves a legacy.

Noble's legacy at Bradford was a mess.

cpwigan wrote:

Doveoverdave wrote:

cpwigan wrote: I forgot Saints had been winning for 10 years previous to this!

Noble inherits a winning team at Bradford (and continues to win for 4 years) and Daniel Anderson has done something different?

Hard to debate with you DOD

From top to bottom Anderson has made a huge difference. He has taken Saints to another level. One where the system of play is almost more important than the players selected. They use the same system from Academy upwards and have overcome injuries, they have let players go due to the cap, they will continue to let senior players go. They will continue to have success. He leaves a legacy.

Noble's legacy at Bradford was a mess.

Mmmmmm...... it was not Nobby's fault the club was bankrupt. I forcast a difficult year for Saints!!!!!

However their golden oldies produced the goods once again an interesting point is that Saints are probably the oldest outfit in SL (go on prove me wrong) Whilst you are the great advocate of youth.

Can you square this particular circle?

Doveoverdave wrote:

cpwigan wrote:

Doveoverdave wrote: Hard to debate with you DOD

From top to bottom Anderson has made a huge difference. He has taken Saints to another level. One where the system of play is almost more important than the players selected. They use the same system from Academy upwards and have overcome injuries, they have let players go due to the cap, they will continue to let senior players go. They will continue to have success. He leaves a legacy.

Noble's legacy at Bradford was a mess.

Mmmmmm...... it was not Nobby's fault the club was bankrupt. I forcast a difficult year for Saints!!!!!

However their golden oldies produced the goods once again an interesting point is that Saints are probably the oldest outfit in SL (go on prove me wrong) Whilst you are the great advocate of youth.

Can you square this particular circle?

Saints were supposed to capitulate this season so you and others said. The gaps have been filled by youngsters. Youngsters that managed to get them wins until Long for example was fit toplay.

I could cheat and say Scully was an integral squad member too if I wanted to prove your point. Not rocket science DOD.

cpwigan wrote:

Doveoverdave wrote:

cpwigan wrote: Mmmmmm...... it was not Nobby's fault the club was bankrupt. I forcast a difficult year for Saints!!!!!

However their golden oldies produced the goods once again an interesting point is that Saints are probably the oldest outfit in SL (go on prove me wrong) Whilst you are the great advocate of youth.

Can you square this particular circle?

Saints were supposed to capitulate this season so you and others said. The gaps have been filled by youngsters. Youngsters that managed to get them wins until Long for example was fit toplay.

I could cheat and say Scully was an integral squad member too if I wanted to prove your point. Not rocket science DOD.

But when they have a full squad they have hardly any one under 25 with lots the wrong side of 30 (Long, Scully, Fozzard, Cayless, Cunningham, Wellens[10 year veteran]. I accept that the youngsters come in and the team is not weakened (Roby For example)Our kids step up come and almost comprehensively fail to meet the standards. This maybe because they are younger youngsters or not as good youngsters.

Our 1st team has a plethora of players 24 or under.

It does appear that the older the better as far as SL is concerned and is a counter philosophy to your own that has reaped wonders for Saints in the SL era.

I have often bemoaned our previous trait of signing old players to retire at Wigan, but they do not seem to do this at Saints (Scully is a good example here.

ian.birchall wrote:

medlocke wrote:
i reckon the inclusion of Barrett threw the team off myself, he should have started at lock with Smith at 6

Just what I was expecting to happen before the team was announced Medlocke but then I had forgotten that Noble only makes stupid positional moves like playing O'Loughlin at stand off and substituting Leueluai after 20 minutes against Stains after he had been moved there when our original hooker was dismissed after 5 minutes even though the original 'plan' had been to bring on Highham after 20 minutes so we had to stick to that.

sheepdip wrote:

ian.birchall wrote:

medlocke wrote:
i reckon the inclusion of Barrett threw the team off myself, he should have started at lock with Smith at 6

Just what I was expecting to happen before the team was announced Medlocke but then I had forgotten that Noble only makes stupid positional moves like playing O'Loughlin at stand off and substituting Leueluai after 20 minutes against Stains after he had been moved there when our original hooker was dismissed after 5 minutes even though the original 'plan' had been to bring on Highham after 20 minutes so we had to stick to that.

Agree 100% I stated before the game that Barrett should not have been included. Tinkering with the 6,7,9 positions during the game is a recipe for disaster. I am impressed with Smith from what I have seen.

Doveoverdave wrote:You have to have pundits that at least sound as if they know what they are talking about. Cullen and Clarke fill this role whilst not filling the airwaves with Aussie acents that portray our game as a foriegn sport like American football, basketball or ice-hockey.

Does no-one watch other sports and their own particular "experts"? The ridiculously pompus Stuart Barnes,the corny "Cor blimey" Redknapp the Olympian scouse swimmer covering these games. All no better or worse than Cullen and Clarke.