WiganWarriorsFans.com

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:09 am**

I am starting to have my doubts this team will ever challenge seriously for honours with this generation of players.

We all have our opinions who should be replaced if in an ideal world that could happen but what concerns me is whether the core of the side is good enough.

Everyone seems to think Carmont is the find of the season, Hock is the worlds best 2nd row, Richards is a great full back or winger but these players are as much a part of the under performing excuse for a team that conceded 29 points without reply today as anyone else.

The same be said of many players who are not the ones everyone focuses on as being not good enough for the team. Those I mention above along with Feka, Goulding, McIllorum, Coley, Hansen, Lockers and TL are apparently the core of our team for the next few seasons.

I am starting to think it isn't just that Fielden has never regained his GB form or that Mathers is poor or Higham isn't the words greatest hooker that is the real problem. The deficiencies of these players such as they are, are what everybody focuses on when in fact the problem is far worse.

The problem is the players we actually think are good or even excellent players simply are not.

They are not good enough to beat an under strength side like HKR and have conceded 29 points unanswered against the worst attack in the league.

They only scrape a draw against a similarly understrength Castleford who prop up the competition.

I can't believe the reason for these poor results is the form of two or three players. The rest of the team are just as responsible.

The coach must take the blame as well but there are plenty of threads on Noble so I wanted to focus on the players and how much is down to them. We have after all signed the majority of the side that lost today up for next season.

At the moment I am struggling to see why.

Dave

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:26 am**

agree with everything you say daveo

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:34 am**

Scenario 1: Coach has lost the team. It only takes a small % decline in motivation/effort to have a huge impact.

Scenario 2: Coach has the players playing systems that are very poor. So poor that whatever players play makes very little difference. The Saints system of play is far far better. Moreover the end result is the Saints players make it look ridiculously easy.

The Scenario I am not prepared to accept is that the players are not good enough. Certainly they are good enough to be top 3 and well ahead of the rest. Results v top opposition say they are good enough. The players we sign as juniors are as good as any in RL. These players do very well at academy/reserve level albeit IMO not as well this year playing the Noble system.

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:57 am**

if they keep this mentality then we are doomed!

no doubt the players have ability to win things, but i think they go into the games with the wrong mindset, i mean hull kr scored to make it 22-16 and our heads went down when we were winning!

this is a major player thing- proffesional sportsmen should need no encouragement to get up for a game!

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:57 am**

cpwigan wrote:Scenario 1: Coach has lost the team. It only takes a small % decline in motivation/effort to have a huge impact.

Scenario 2: Coach has the players playing systems that are very poor. So poor that whatever players play makes very little difference. The Saints system of play is far far better. Moreover the end result is the Saints players make it look ridiculously easy.

The Scenario I am not prepared to accept is that the players are not good enough. Certainly they are good enough to be top 3 and well ahead of the rest. Results v top opposition say they are good enough. The players we sign as juniors are as good as any in RL. These players do very well at academy/reserve level albeit IMO not as well this year playing the Noble system.

There may be something in your two scenarios but although I do not wish to defend Noble but there must be more too it than that.

However I don't think beating a top side every now and again proves the side it good enough. It proves it can raise its game for the odd occasion but what proves if a side is good enough or not is the record across the whole season not the odd one off match. We are dismal on the latter score.

In any case apart from Bradford in the play-offs last season the team has not won many crucial games lately by which I mean we can beat Leeds in the league but not the play-offs which is when it matters.

The team can't defend and concedes many soft tries(Lockers in the side or not) and players are making basic mistakes (such as Hock knocking on at the PTB today) which can only be down to the players.

I do think Noble must carry the can for the way the team plays ultimately but I also think the entire first 17 has a collective responsibility for some of the rubbish served up this season and if they do have this responsibility, then I think it's a fair question to ask if as players they are ultimately good enough to compete in this league at the top level. I am wondering if we have been kidding ourselves as to just how good some of these players are.

Dave

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:01 am**

cherry.pie wrote:
DaveO wrote: Everyone seems to think Carmont is the find of the season, Hock is the worlds best 2nd row, Richards is a great full back or winger but these players are as much a part of the under performing excuse for a team that conceded 29 points without reply today as anyone else.
People rave about Carmont because of his quality compared to his apparently low cost, in which case they are justified after the disappointment of Vaealiki who was a costly mistake (his signing that is).
Gareth Hock is a great player and most people can see it, he can be the most influential man on the pitch, but he can't do anything when the whole team doesn't perform.
Surely no one can fault Richards, he is consistent and rarely at fault. Would get into most SL teams.

DaveO wrote: The same be said of many players who are not the ones everyone focuses on as being not good enough for the team. Those I mention above along with Feka, Goulding, McIllorum, Coley, Hansen, Lockers and TL are apparently the core of our team for the next few seasons.
How can you possibly criticise the likes of Goulding, McIlorum, Hansen and Leuluai and say that they aren't good enough when they are all young and are far from being considered in their 'prime'.
TL has the promise to be a really good half back, indeed many consider him to be one already. He's outplayed Barrett this season but where is the criticism for him? Hansen is arguably one of the best defensive player in SL, 3rd top tackler in SL and doesn't even play a full 80.
At the start of this season Goulding was just 19, and coming off a really good season where he scored tries for fun coming off the bench, he's shown a bit of form of late too. He's incredibly young for a starting centre, in fact he's young for a first team regular full stop, yet still showed in the Leeds game that he can perform as well as the best already.
McIlorum has been one of our most consistent players, and seems very underrated considering he is only young himself.
He hasn't done anything wrong and looks good enough for SL.

DaveO wrote: The coach must take the blame as well but there are plenty of threads on Noble so I wanted to focus on the players and how much is down to them. We have after all signed the majority of the side that lost today up for next season.

At the moment I am struggling to see why.
If Wigan decided to sell Hansen, Lockers, Goulding, McIlorum or any of the other players who are supposedly not good enough then what would that say? That the board are going back on their promise to bring in home grown talent.
None of those players are having poor seasons except maybe Goulding. Lockers is having an average season but he's got a lot of expectation and responsibility resting on his shoulders (which obviously hasn't hampered his recovery!).

The young players at Wigan need to be kept, they out play some of the big name players. O'Carroll and Prescott have had more good games than Fielden. Hansen and Tomkins are much better than Bailey has been this season. McIlorum started out much better than Higham, who has improved a lot recently. Even Goulding has managed 8 tries despite not playing his best.
These players have shown they can be good enough when the tactics are right. Our game plan against Leeds was spot on, I have a suspicion we didn't have the right game plan against KR today where we would probably have needed 4 props rather than 3 and a winger at second row.

Excellent post. The fact that it is so difficult to criticise so many players in the Wigan squad suggests that the problem is mainly with the coach (and possibly the attitude of a few players). The rovers first and only line of defence was hitting us at full speed before our attackers had taken a step forward, no wonder we were so knackered in the second half.

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:44 am**

cherry.pie wrote:
DaveO wrote: Everyone seems to think Carmont is the find of the season, Hock is the worlds best 2nd row, Richards is a great full back or winger but these players are as much a part of the under performing excuse for a team that conceded 29 points without reply today as anyone else.
People rave about Carmont because of his quality compared to his apparently low cost, in which case they are justified after the disappointment of Vaealiki who was a costly mistake (his signing that is).

So does that make him good enough? Better than DV is one thing. Good enough in absolute terms is another.

Gareth Hock is a great player and most people can see it, he can be the most influential man on the pitch, but he can't do anything when the whole team doesn't perform.
Surely no one can fault Richards, he is consistent and rarely at fault. Would get into most SL teams.

Hock can be great but he can also (too often??) not be. Richards as a full back is not the real deal. He offers little in attack from full back and his support play is none existent. We are playing him at full back because Mathers has turned out poor.

DaveO wrote: The same be said of many players who are not the ones everyone focuses on as being not good enough for the team. Those I mention above along with Feka, Goulding, McIllorum, Coley, Hansen, Lockers and TL are apparently the core of our team for the next few seasons.
How can you possibly criticise the likes of Goulding, McIlorum, Hansen and Leuluai and say that they aren't good enough when they are all young and are far from being considered in their 'prime'.

Well I can criticise these players because they conceded 29 unanswered points.

TL has the promise to be a really good half back, indeed many consider him to be one already. He's outplayed Barrett this season but where is the criticism for him?

To say TL has outplayed Barrett this season is laughable. He simply hasn't but in any case Barrett is leaving and TL isn't. So Barretts form has nothing to do with whether the players we have retained will ever be good enough which was the point of my post.

Hansen is arguably one of the best defensive player in SL, 3rd top tackler in SL and doesn't even play a full 80.
At the start of this season Goulding was just 19, and coming off a really good season where he scored tries for fun coming off the bench, he's shown a bit of form of late too. He's incredibly young for a starting centre, in fact he's young for a first team regular full stop, yet still showed in the Leeds game that he can perform as well as the best already.
McIlorum has been one of our most consistent players, and seems very underrated considering he is only young himself.
He hasn't done anything wrong and looks good enough for SL.

McIllorum isn't playing that well at all IMO but never mind that I think so far you have said just about every player is a good player - so how come they play like the did today and v Cas far too often?

If they were all as good as you say we'd be top of the league. We aren't.

DaveO wrote: The coach must take the blame as well but there are plenty of threads on Noble so I wanted to focus on the players and how much is down to them. We have after all signed the majority of the side that lost today up for next season.

At the moment I am struggling to see why.
If Wigan decided to sell Hansen, Lockers, Goulding, McIlorum or any of the other players who are supposedly not good enough then what would that say.That the board are going back on their promise to bring in home grown talent.
?

Who said anything about selling them? We can't do that. In fact we are stuck with them no matter how good or bad they are or turn out to be. As to home grown talent it must be good enough or there is no point being able to point to a team full of it if ultimately it fails.

None of those players are having poor seasons except maybe Goulding. Lockers is having an average season but he's got a lot of expectation and responsibility resting on his shoulders (which obviously hasn't hampered his recovery!).

If none of these players are having a poor season then how do you explain our poor defence and several results as bad or worse than todays? Some players and it has got to be more than one or two, are not doing the job right.

The young players at Wigan need to be kept, they out play some of the big name players. O'Carroll and Prescott have had more good games than Fielden. Hansen and Tomkins are much better than Bailey has been this season. McIlorum started out much better than Higham, who has improved a lot recently. Even Goulding has managed 8 tries despite not playing his best.

McIllorum needs a break and he has never been much better than Higham in that he suffers from many of the same faults but that isn't the issue. All these young players have played a major part in our season as have the senior players. And that is the point. Our squad as a whole has played as it has so despite saying certain players are great or potentially great they are not right this minute. Some players are inconsistent. Some are letting in soft tries. Some may just not be that good e.g. Colbon. Will they ever be good enough?

These players have shown they can be good enough when the tactics are right. Our game plan against Leeds was spot on, I have a suspicion we didn't have the right game plan against KR today where we would probably have needed 4 props rather than 3 and a winger at second row.

It can't be that simple. In any case it isn't just today. It's against Cas, Hull away, Les Cats at home not to mention the drubbings off Saints.

We have not looked convincing all season but apparently our players are great.

Dave[/b]

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:32 am**

DaveO wrote:
cpwigan wrote:Scenario 1: Coach has lost the team. It only takes a small % decline in motivation/effort to have a huge impact.

Scenario 2: Coach has the players playing systems that are very poor. So poor that whatever players play makes very little difference. The Saints system of play is far far better. Moreover the end result is the Saints players make it look ridiculously easy.

The Scenario I am not prepared to accept is that the players are not good enough. Certainly they are good enough to be top 3 and well ahead of the rest. Results v top opposition say they are good enough. The players we sign as juniors are as good as any in RL. These players do very well at academy/reserve level albeit IMO not as well this year playing the Noble system.
There may be something in your two scenarios but although I do not wish to defend Noble but there must be more too it than that.

However I don't think beating a top side every now and again proves the side it good enough. It proves it can raise its game for the odd occasion but what proves if a side is good enough or not is the record across the whole season not the odd one off match. We are dismal on the latter score.

In any case apart from Bradford in the play-offs last season the team has not won many crucial games lately by which I mean we can beat Leeds in the league but not the play-offs which is when it matters.

The team can't defend and concedes many soft tries(Lockers in the side or not) and players are making basic mistakes (such as Hock knocking on at the PTB today) which can only be down to the players.

I do think Noble must carry the can for the way the team plays ultimately but I also think the entire first 17 has a collective responsibility for some of the rubbish served up this season and if they do have this responsibility, then I think it's a fair question to ask if as players they are ultimately good enough to compete in this league at the top level. I am wondering if we have been kidding ourselves as to just how good some of these players are.

Dave

There is a definite lack of something call it discipline / professionalism or whatever within the club BUT that comes from the coach. You (Dave) will remember Monie talking about the culture/ethos being very different when he came back the second time. To some extent Monie managed to turn it around.

I think the present set up is not good enough. Firstly, I do not think the technical know how exists within theclub. Alex Ferguson is an old man set in his ways, he has always married his strengths with assistants who are almost the opposite of himself. McLaren and Quieroz both studious looking for the latest advantages. THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS. Jack Gibson was called the master coach BUT he owed a lot to his assistant Ron Massey who was the opposite and had strengths that Gibson did not. Gibson actively sought Monie as a coach. Monie and Gibson were like chalk and cheese.

There is nothing in the Wigan RLFC club that stretches the boundaries of modern RL coaching / player development. It is the same old same old. Jobs for the boys. When you look beneath the first team there are some awful hangers on in the background. Non entities.

Physical fitness / conditioning. I have gone on enough in the past. Mike Forshaw? Strikes me as player's pal whereas I would think he needs to be the guy they hate/dread. He cannot be at the cutting edge neither.

So the set up is poor and yo add to our woes there is no pressure on our players. Lack of pressure is a worry gull stop in SL. South Sydney bottom of the NRL, players on big contracts. 6 breach club rules. the coach drops them, disciplines them, sacks one as co captain. The co captain was one of the biggest contracts in the club. Since sacking these players, giving others a chance, Souths have won 6 out of 6 matches. The so called stars are still sat on the benches watching matches.

Coaches create culture

A fancy gym does not create culture

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:33 am**

I don't think that there is one problem with the team; I think that you can put it down to a number of factors. I think that at times our game plan is naive and we have trouble switching to plan "b".However the most obvious problem that the team has is that it does not deal with adversity very well. When things go wrong; there is nothing the team can do to stop it and turn it around. Errors lead to more errors and penalties lead to more penalties. As soon as things start to get tough, we rapidly become our own worst enemy.

In high pressure games you see our true colours; we fold like a deck chair in a high wind, with no-one willing to take control of the game - everyone does their own thing. We don't seem to have a strong personality and collectively the team is lacking a never say die attitude. Never was this more in evidence than on the occasions we have played our most bitter rivals this year. They turn up chomping at the bit; we run around like headless chickens.

In our last victory over leeds, we only just held on. When things got tough; we lost our way and had the game been even a few minutes longer we would have lost.

Dave mentioned last seasons effort against Bradford. We only started to play when it looked like the game was gone and Bradford had withdrawn several of their best players. Once we got on top - we played well.

On the subject of Carmont; I think that not only was he a bargain, but he is probably one of the best centres in the league. Despite our non-performance yesterday, he still managed to score 2 tries - even though it was doubtful if he would even play - if we had a few more players like him then I think that we would do a lot better!

I do think that Barrett has not been as good this season; whilst he does have flashes of brilliance in most games, his general play is not as good as it was last year.

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:26 am**

i fully agree with cps points on this....

you can have all the best players in the world but if you are plying them in a system they dont like or arnt used to and come up against tough teams like they do in super league it isnt going to work...

when i go watching them at the jjb and most of the time at away matches there seems to be no passion, no determination in the side, they just look as if ahh forget it theyve just scored 2 trys we cant win now....

look at saints they often got off to bad starts last season but always fire back with half an hour or so left to go because they all work together, all respect each others abilities and all play a system thats suits them so they are successful...

WiganWarriorsFans.com

Will this team ever be good enough?

Will this team ever be good enough?

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...

Re: Will this team ever be goo...