WiganWarriorsFans.com

butt monkey wrote:TL as a scrum half is not great. It took Wayne Bennett (who was then coach of New Zealand) to introduce TL as an interchange hooker and Wigan copied that with much success.

However, he and George do not combine well together but at least TL can tackle. Our problem is that we could have done with Escare at full back and Sam in the halves with TL coming off the bench for MM. Far more balanced team in my opinion

Wonder if that was the plan for this season, possibly to also easr Shorrocks into scrum half role, until he got injured?

If Smith was any good he would still be at Wigan.

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

5miler wrote:Watts also on report for the cannonball tackle on Bateman a few minutes earlier.

I am sure that was Griffin!!

just seen it back on Wigan tv.I stand corrected.

No mention of Watts on SL site for this week's disciplinary??? Not even a "sending off sufficient" or "not guilty".

Can anybody explain?

Answered my own question. Found this from Hull Daily Mail:

Details on Watts and McIlorum incident
No ban but the RFL still saying the call is sending off sufficient.

“Player carrying ball in and begins to change direction and brace for impact from defender who is approaching player at speed from the inside. Elbow and forearm of player are not promoted. Contact made between head of opponent and front of arm of opponent. Sending Off Sufficient,” the RFL stated on their website.

INCIDENT:

Strikes with forearm in the 22nd minute (McIlorum)

16:44
Details of no charge on O'Loughlin after late hit on Sneyd
“Player makes contact with opponent after ball has been kicked. Contact is made in open-handed manner to chest then hands rides upwards to make some contact to face of opponent. Worthy of on field penalty,” the RFL stated on their website.

DECISION:

No charge

INCIDENT:

Late contact in the 2nd minute (Sneyd)

16:43
No charge details on Griffin
“Player initially makes contact to back of opponent. Player then backs out of tackle before re-entering, making direct contact to back of legs of opponent. Contact made to back of upper leg of opponent and player has not applied pressure against natural range of movement. Other defenders then take opponent to ground,” the RFL stated on their website.

DECISION:

No charge

INCIDENT:

Dangerous Contact in the 17th minute (Bateman)

I've already posted the disciplinary outcome on the General Forum.


I think it's a fair outcome.

The more I look at the incident it wasn't a sending off Watts hard to done to with the benefit of hindsight of course oh well all done now

fozzieskem wrote:The more I look at the incident it wasn't a sending off Watts hard to done to with the benefit of hindsight of course oh well all done now

I have thought the sending off was 50/50. For me, what probably pushed the on field decision was Watts' follow through into Clubb in almost the same action. Now that was high, that was intentional and if that same elbow had connected that WOULD have cleaned Tony Clubb out

butt monkey wrote:

fozzieskem wrote:The more I look at the incident it wasn't a sending off Watts hard to done to with the benefit of hindsight of course oh well all done now

I have thought the sending off was 50/50. For me, what probably pushed the on field decision was Watts' follow through into Clubb in almost the same action. Now that was high, that was intentional and if that same elbow had connected that WOULD have cleaned Tony Clubb out

On that I agree he did go in high with the follow through but I think if we take that away it's a poor tackle by MM that led to the sending off,that said someone was going to be sent off at some due to the general niggling that was going around all evening.

Not a fan of the two ref system but nights like Friday it makes sense.

Think it was 50/50 as to the intent. Only Watts knows the truth.
My point of view is it was an on purpose, as opposed to an accident.

josie andrews wrote:I've already posted the disciplinary outcome on the General Forum.


I think it's a fair outcome.

Sorry Josie.