WiganWarriorsFans.com

robjoenz posted:
Perhaps most players commit a high tackle once per 20 tackles on average in a single half, however, most player don't make that many. If he makes so many tackles maybe he's tired and his form slides a little. I'd rather him give away a penalty or two than let an attacker through for a try.

But if a player is getting penalised for high tackles on a regular basis why are people excusing this?

Surely any pleyer who is giving a penalty away for the same thing week in week out needs to do somethng about it?

If he keeps doing it and it starts to get noticed it won't be long before he gets a reputation as a head hunter and is penalised more due to refs being on the look out for him.

Isn't that stating the obvious?

Dave

Your last post is your best Dave re; the reputation and getting penalised.

Your first post re. "Averaging just about one penalty per game for high tackles isn't good and is not mitigated by whatever else he does." is your worst in as long as I can remember Dave.

To the best of my knowledge, Lockers only concedes penalties for high tackles. If we accept your view that he has a tackling problem then I would say you notion it is inexcusable (mitigated) by whatever else he does is absolutely poppy cock. Martin Offiah was a terrible defender but we excused it because of what he did when we had the ball. Kelvin Skerrett gave penalties away. However, it was part of role to enforce himself on the opposition, we excused it. Terry Newton gave away countless penalties yet our defensive record with him in the team was better and he was a great hooker, we excused it. Lockers is making 30 to 40 tackles, taking the ball up well. He is vital to our team. THAT far outweight the odd penalty.

Bryn Hargreaves never conceded a single penalty when playing for Wigan. Who would you rather have at prop, Bryn or Scott Logan?

St Helens conceded a very high number of penalties. I believe they actually do so deliberately when they get ahead, taking the view 2 points is better than 6.

I may be right or wrong but my impression is the number of penalties in RL has increased in recent times. I would also like to see whether Lockers conceded more or less penalties early in the game / later, when the best team is on the pitch / substitutes are on, when a player from the opposition is simply making yards / or threatening the tryline. So many variables to consider.

Lockers has not hurt a single opponent to the best of my knowledge. He is not stiff arming opponents. He is an excellent tackler who is vigorous in his tackling technique, if he was playing in Aus he would conceded far less penalties. Essentially he is taking opponents 1 on 1 and he is attempting to hit above the ball, being light compared to say props he throws himself into the tackle and his arm comes over and around the ball carrier. It looks much much worse than it is.

The person who needs to sort his tackling technique (not as regards penalties) is Fecka.

cpwigan posted:
Your last post is your best Dave re; the reputation and getting penalised.

Your first post re. "Averaging just about one penalty per game for high tackles isn't good and is not mitigated by whatever else he does." is your worst in as long as I can remember Dave.

To the best of my knowledge, Lockers only concedes penalties for high tackles. If we accept your view that he has a tackling problem then I would say you notion it is inexcusable (mitigated) by whatever else he does is absolutely poppy cock. Martin Offiah was a terrible defender but we excused it because of what he did when we had the ball. Kelvin Skerrett gave penalties away. However, it was part of role to enforce himself on the opposition, we excused it. Terry Newton gave away countless penalties yet our defensive record with him in the team was better and he was a great hooker, we excused it. Lockers is making 30 to 40 tackles, taking the ball up well. He is vital to our team. THAT far outweight the odd penalty.

Bryn Hargreaves never conceded a single penalty when playing for Wigan. Who would you rather have at prop, Bryn or Scott Logan?

St Helens conceded a very high number of penalties. I believe they actually do so deliberately when they get ahead, taking the view 2 points is better than 6.

I may be right or wrong but my impression is the number of penalties in RL has increased in recent times. I would also like to see whether Lockers conceded more or less penalties early in the game / later, when the best team is on the pitch / substitutes are on, when a player from the opposition is simply making yards / or threatening the tryline. So many variables to consider.

Lockers has not hurt a single opponent to the best of my knowledge. He is not stiff arming opponents. He is an excellent tackler who is vigorous in his tackling technique, if he was playing in Aus he would conceded far less penalties. Essentially he is taking opponents 1 on 1 and he is attempting to hit above the ball, being light compared to say props he throws himself into the tackle and his arm comes over and around the ball carrier. It looks much much worse than it is.

The person who needs to sort his tackling technique (not as regards penalties) is Fecka.

I agree with a lot of what you say accept the bold points above and think you are way off the mark with both of these comments.

Wigan Watcher posted:
I agree with a lot of what you say accept the bold points above and think you are way off the mark with both of these comments.

.... because?

Fraggle posted:

Wigan Watcher posted:
I agree with a lot of what you say accept the bold points above and think you are way off the mark with both of these comments.

.... because?

He is not vital to the team and he is very poor at tackling.

Wigan Watcher posted:

Fraggle posted:

Wigan Watcher posted:
I agree with a lot of what you say accept the bold points above and think you are way off the mark with both of these comments.

.... because?

He is not vital to the team and he is very poor at tackling.

I guess the first could only be proven by taking him out of the team and seeing the difference. Personally, I don't think we've got any other potential loose-forwards who would be better than him (we've only got 2nd rows who play the lock position as if they are 2nd rows - Tomkins being the first one who comes to mind like this), and as others have pointed out repeatedly, he makes huge numbers of tackles in every game, 95% of which are legal and perfectly good. Even ignoring the one or two that get penalised, his tackle rate is up there with the best of the team so he must be doing something right.

I always ask this question in cases like this, but rarely get any sensible answers - if Lockers is no good, who would you replace him with in the current squad who would DEFINITELY do a better job?

One of my all time favourite tackles is Andy Gregory playing for GB upon Mal Meninga for Aus from a kick off. Mal ran straight at Greg who threw himself into Menings, arms almost crossed/folded and smashed him to the ground.

Today he would be sent off, banned and hung :conf:

Fraggle posted:

Wigan Watcher posted:

Fraggle posted: .... because?

He is not vital to the team and he is very poor at tackling.

I guess the first could only be proven by taking him out of the team and seeing the difference. Personally, I don't think we've got any other potential loose-forwards who would be better than him (we've only got 2nd rows who play the lock position as if they are 2nd rows - Tomkins being the first one who comes to mind like this), and as others have pointed out repeatedly, he makes huge numbers of tackles in every game, 95% of which are legal and perfectly good. Even ignoring the one or two that get penalised, his tackle rate is up there with the best of the team so he must be doing something right.

I always ask this question in cases like this, but rarely get any sensible answers - if Lockers is no good, who would you replace him with in the current squad who would DEFINITELY do a better job?

Totally agree with you Fraggle, we have no one better than him for work rate and it is this and only this that is keeping him in the team that and we do not have anyone better at the moment.

I find it very sad that the finest team in the world has a player playing a pivotal role in the team just because he has a better work rate than his team mates.

Come on Wigan find us a loose forward, someone who can use the ball.

O'Loughlin is a very talented ball player and runner of the ball. Ellery Hanley did not do too badly and he was no passer of the rugby ball

cpwigan posted:
O'Loughlin is a very talented ball player and runner of the ball. Ellery Hanley did not do too badly and he was no passer of the rugby ball

I hope you bowed your head when you mention one of the finest, but please do not mention Lockers in the same sentence as the master.

Did not pass the ball………pleeeeeeeeeeeease