In terms of tactics, I would disagree. Tactics weren't the issue last night, it was execution. We dropped the ball with the line begging a couple of times, and we threw the ball into touch a couple of times when in great attacking positions, which is just stuff that we don't normally do. I would argue that if the tactics were wrong we wouldn't have been in such good field position for much of the game, nor been in the position for those many many chances that we blew.
You say the coach didn't have an option B, but then why did he need it, in attack it was going okay. Again, we were creating chances right up until the end of the game, and lets be honest, we only lost because we gifted them a silly try to clinch it, and missed a basic kick.
The tactics were fine, and created us more than enough field position to do it, had we not started throwing the ball to the linesman, or their player!
The soft defence at times is a little bit harder to excuse.
Your Ryan Atkins attack is as OTT as the rest of your post IMHO. I'm not his biggest fan, but he has 11 tries and 11 assists, so he is going okay for someone who is the worst centre in SL, and considering we were told he couldn't pass, his asssists seem to disprove that.
He may well have 11 tries but that in itself does not at all tell the full story.
Playing in a team with Warringtons record this season that amount of tries I would say is about what would or could be expected, nothing exceptional about that..
Atkins is one focused ( on himself) and does not provide anything like what he ought to do, I was not simply singleing out his performance in this game but I have been pretty unimpressed with him as a CENTRE this season, one or two ( usually against the poorer sides) games excepted.
OTT? Well if you want, but for me it was a realistic assessment of how Atkins plays all to often.
Naive defence would possibly be more appropriate. Warrington have, the Wigan game apart, all to often shown a frailty of concentration in the tight games. They have the players but somehow with one or two notable exceptions, there is a tendency to go to sleep collectively, in defence.
So you disagree that Warrington played the second half primarily to the blindside right with a maximum of two or three men in the plays they made?
I would suggest a re-run of a tape if you have one, because that was the way that they played throughout the second half mainly and as I said , they made the defending easy for Saints with that tactic.
I did not mean to appear critical of the game or indeed the endeavour that every player on the pitch put in but I think that Warrington, as they did V Leeds where the architects of their own downfall in a game that they ought to have won.
I will concede your point on execution of plays but I thought the play and possibly coaching instructions? Constrained the teams attacking abilities and although as you say they made the yards, well I contend that was when there was a more expansive method utilised, they were a bit one dimensional and payed the price for that.
On Myler, well that game was one that he needed to control and in all honesty he could not do so, again I admire his guts but I tend to believe that he is not going to be the natural heir to Briers, which I believe is what he was intended to be eventually.
Honestly I wanted Warrington to win but I became so frustrated by their methods especially in the second half I am amazed that no one else seems to have noticed it at all.
The game was superb but a result ought to have been achieved and Warrington again managed to snatch defeat out of the jaws of you know what.