WiganWarriorsFans.com

Spartacus, IMO had we played a decent style of RL we would have beaten Hull by 30+ so I disagree with your notion of giving credit to the opposition. Friday, like the overwhelming majority of SL games, was about how Wigan turn up and what they do. We have 2 games soon v Leeds and Saints which will be real contests even if we play well. I do not think that applies to Hull FC, Hull KR, Huddersfield, Widnes and Castleford. All those clubs if we turn up with the right attitude and right game plan then we should win relatively easily no matter what the opposition do. So for me in those instances it is all about Wigan not giving or not giving the opposition credit. Not that I expect any RL team to roll over and lie down.

At the present time our game plan sucks v anybody IMO so again that is down to Wigan.

sc74 wrote:

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Just a question for sc74, have you ever posted anything positive?

Great question, well done.

Was that pointless sarcasm or just patronising?

cpwigan wrote:Spartacus, IMO had we played a decent style of RL we would have beaten Hull by 30+ so I disagree with your notion of giving credit to the opposition. Friday, like the overwhelming majority of SL games, was about how Wigan turn up and what they do. We have 2 games soon v Leeds and Saints which will be real contests even if we play well. I do not think that applies to Hull FC, Hull KR, Huddersfield, Widnes and Castleford. All those clubs if we turn up with the right attitude and right game plan then we should win relatively easily no matter what the opposition do. So for me in those instances it is all about Wigan not giving or not giving the opposition credit. Not that I expect any RL team to roll over and lie down.

At the present time our game plan sucks v anybody IMO so again that is down to Wigan.

The thing about journalism CP is that they extract the bits that have the greatest sound bite. In your previous post you took the Wane quote;

"If we had been more clinical in that final third, we could have won by 20 points"

If you actually listen to the post match interview, he follows that immediately with "that was down to them"

Hull defended well and I was simply pointing out that nobody ever gives credit to the opposition when they get something right. The argument that 'if we had done this then that' is the same as saying If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle. It is a pointless meaningless argument.

I also wasn't talking about how the game plan sucks v anybody. I was specifically talking about the game v Hull and the fact that they defended well. They deserve some credit for doing that.



I also said that our game plan was predictable and I'm repeating that for the third time now, which you raise as an argument against me when you are actually agreeing with me.

Hull are a mediocre also ran team, and so are we until the distributors of the ball start to find some form.

i'm spartacus wrote:

cpwigan wrote:Spartacus, IMO had we played a decent style of RL we would have beaten Hull by 30+ so I disagree with your notion of giving credit to the opposition. Friday, like the overwhelming majority of SL games, was about how Wigan turn up and what they do. We have 2 games soon v Leeds and Saints which will be real contests even if we play well. I do not think that applies to Hull FC, Hull KR, Huddersfield, Widnes and Castleford. All those clubs if we turn up with the right attitude and right game plan then we should win relatively easily no matter what the opposition do. So for me in those instances it is all about Wigan not giving or not giving the opposition credit. Not that I expect any RL team to roll over and lie down.

At the present time our game plan sucks v anybody IMO so again that is down to Wigan.

The thing about journalism CP is that they extract the bits that have the greatest sound bite. In your previous post you took the Wane quote;

"If we had been more clinical in that final third, we could have won by 20 points"

If you actually listen to the post match interview, he follows that immediately with "that was down to them"

Hull defended well and I was simply pointing out that nobody ever gives credit to the opposition when they get something right. The argument that 'if we had done this then that' is the same as saying If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle. It is a pointless meaningless argument.

I also wasn't talking about how the game plan sucks v anybody. I was specifically talking about the game v Hull and the fact that they defended well. They deserve some credit for doing that.



I also said that our game plan was predictable and I'm repeating that for the third time now, which you raise as an argument against me when you are actually agreeing with me.

Hull are a mediocre also ran team, and so are we until the distributors of the ball start to find some form.

And the pack generate some go forward to allow the playmakers to play.