Re: Danny Orr Debate
Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:13 am
Danny Orr? We shouldn't have touched him with a barge pole.
A site for fans of Wigan Warriors RLFC. News, views, statistics, profiles and more all contributed by supporters of Wigan RL.
https://www.wiganwarriorsfans.com/
Yes there is a pattern we ran our games through Faz now give Orr a chance. Matty Johns was turned into an average player in the team due to letting Faz run games and playing a pattern through the loose forward.ChrisA posted:
I love you lot, rather your comments amuse me. It's been the same with every stand off we have had for about the last 6 years, Matthew Johns was denegrated by the fans for failing to produce, Julian O'neill also ,and now its the turn of Danny Orr aswel. Are all these bad players ? no they are not, we play a system where we use very few dummy runners, we play way to flat in attack, combine these 2 aspects of our game and it left where both our halves have very little options when going forward, even at Cas Danny Orr always had runners, that creates a little bit of confusion in the oppositions mind and can give players that chance at a break or haf break, but at the moment he isnt getting any runners, the lines to flat so hes running around looking for runners that are not there and if they are they are to flat anyway, and nowadays with the fitness levels being so high you dont find many gaps in defensive lines, thats where varying your attack comes in so people like Danny Orr can exploit them, but we dont. In my oppinion our whole style of play is to blame and not just Danny Orr, we lack ideas and structure.
Exactly, around the 96-97 season, we started to lose all our best players, and the only real playmaker we had left was Farrel. So we depended on him every week and our whole game plan was built around him. We have never truely gotten away from that even when we got in Adrian Lam and Matty Johns(lets not forget Lam suffered similar doubts), we do base our whole game around Farrel, but thats all wrong, your attack should be based around your halves and not a loose forward. We have got into a rut where we dont really play great attacking rugby, we dont play to much off the cuff rugby like Saints or Leeds do. We need to be more expansive with our game, we need more runners and have a deeper line, until we do this, who ever we have at stand off will look like a bad player.thegimble posted:Yes there is a pattern we ran our games through Faz now give Orr a chance. Matty Johns was turned into an average player in the team due to letting Faz run games and playing a pattern through the loose forward.ChrisA posted:
I love you lot, rather your comments amuse me. It's been the same with every stand off we have had for about the last 6 years, Matthew Johns was denegrated by the fans for failing to produce, Julian O'neill also ,and now its the turn of Danny Orr aswel. Are all these bad players ? no they are not, we play a system where we use very few dummy runners, we play way to flat in attack, combine these 2 aspects of our game and it left where both our halves have very little options when going forward, even at Cas Danny Orr always had runners, that creates a little bit of confusion in the oppositions mind and can give players that chance at a break or haf break, but at the moment he isnt getting any runners, the lines to flat so hes running around looking for runners that are not there and if they are they are to flat anyway, and nowadays with the fitness levels being so high you dont find many gaps in defensive lines, thats where varying your attack comes in so people like Danny Orr can exploit them, but we dont. In my oppinion our whole style of play is to blame and not just Danny Orr, we lack ideas and structure.
Give Orr until end of the season if no imporovement then yes he got to go. Just guive him until then and then judge him.
Yes agreed on some points, it doesnt matter what postion you are if you are a ball player, and use them to the best you can, but you cant base your game on a ball playing prop can you, and yes Steve Norton was an awsome ball player, but in those days with the 5 metre rule, players had to stand deeper, players had to be alot better with the ball than what they are now, the game was diferent then (for the better aswel) players knew how to stand deep and use dummy runners, people knew how to hit a gap, thats doesnt happen much anymore because of the 10 metre rule, you cant compare the sitution from 1985 because the game has changed since then. And anyone with Peter Stirling at scrum half will always get good ball in decent positions.Doug Stand posted:
I disagree with the point to base your players around your halves. It doesn't matter what position you play if you are a ball player. Look at Hull in 85, Steve Norton the then loose forward went first receiver a lot of the time and fed Stirling and Ah Koh. (esxcuse spelling)
Old fashioned Field props used to be the ball players
Now is Faz really that much of a ball player??? He's not in the league of Edwards, Gregory or Kenny for picking out a pass. Currently we don't have a player like that and you need one.
You would never have had Hanley in a first receiver as a ball player because he couldn't pass, he was runner and although he was special in that he could create his own openings, runners rely on the pass. So what is Orr, what is his speciality? He's not a ball player, he doesn't make the breaks...what is he doing? Backing up???? maybe... The stand-off in any side has to be the one that can turn a game. OK not in every play, but the one to do something magic. Maguire does it, Horne, Rooney do it... Orr does not.
OK he was out for a good bit with injury last year and I accept that, but he needs to start imposing himself in games starting on Friday!
Yeah I get your drift Doug and you do make some good points, I just feel he is good enough, he is just lacking confidence in himself, he just needs to stay fit and get some decent games in, that will bring the confidence he needs to really stamp down his authority.Doug Stand posted:
Yeah good point on the 5m rule Chris.. but you get the overall drift on what I'm saying.
Also, yeah you are right with Maguire and Leeds. Like my Dad says if you have a decent pack you can pick your backs up on the streets. Good points you make.
Leeds are a better outfit than us (stops to choke) which put even more pressure on the stand-off to do something. Now I know he's no Hanley and there will never be another one, but how many times did we see Wigan playing oh so bad, pack and all and Hanley do something out of the blue and the game was won.
Regadless as to what the stand-off is behind he has to have the edge that when he gets the ball something could happen. I don't feel that with Orr.
Also the excpectaitions of some fans can weigh just as heavily, and when the don not perform we are the first on there backs.Doug Stand posted:Agreed, confidence is everything.ChrisA posted:
Yeah I get your drift Doug and you do make some good points, I just feel he is good enough, he is just lacking confidence in himself, he just needs to stay fit and get some decent games in, that will bring the confidence he needs to really stamp down his authority.
Right I'm off the Orr bashing bandwagon as from now. I really want him to do well for his own sake as for the team and supporters. I'll give him until...end of May. By then we will know.
You know there are some players who just can't cut it at Wigan. The ghosts of players past weigh heavy on new players shoulders... and I'm the worse one for comparing with the olden days, aplogies for that and here's to Danny Orr