Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

30/08/13 - St Helens v Warrington Wolves KO 8pm (Sky Sports)


  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

Poll: Who will win? (14 member(s) have cast votes)

Who will win?

  1. St Helens (5 votes [35.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 35.71%

  2. Voted Warrington Wolves (8 votes [57.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.14%

  3. Draw (1 votes [7.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.14%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#101 Wilderspoolmemories

Wilderspoolmemories
  • Coach
  • 751 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 07:31 AM

Not the best overall from wire.... but two points in the bag. I'm going catalan next week and think wire will get thrashed. players will be rested for play offs as as 2nd spot is guaranteed and hudds will probably confirm first place tomorrow. Had we not thrown it away twice against weirdness this season we could have finished top. Well done Smith and Co! Although if we win the grand final no one will give a damn!
2009 Warrington 25 Hudderfield 16
2010 Warrington 30 Leeds 6
2011 League Leaders Shield Winners
2012 Warrington 35 Leeds 18

Challenge cups and league leaders shields everywhere! We need more silver polish!

#102 Exiled Wiganer

Exiled Wiganer
  • Coach
  • 6,346 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 07:58 AM

Very nasty from Cooper, that.
I wonder whether Wire will rest players next week end now they're assured of second? They seem to have put what must have been the crushing disappointment at missing out on both of the trophies on offer so far, which shows some character.

#103 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 08:36 AM

I thought Cummings explained the Cooper incident well. Sky werent interested though and went for sensational.

#104 JonNgog

JonNgog
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 09:11 AM

I thought Cummings explained the Cooper incident well. Sky werent interested though and went for sensational.


It did look a lot worse than what it really was. I saw it from the Saints terrace and it looked an absolute shocker, but watching it back on TV, not so much.

#105 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 09:13 AM

Does it really make any difference what Cummins said? We all saw it with our own eyes, we don't need him to mitigate it.

It was a bad challenge, and if you don't accept that, then you aren't watching the same game as me.

brilliant. no penalty and no further action will be taken.
aye, really bad challenge.

#106 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 09:22 AM

Are you missing the point on purpose?

It doesn't matter what the outcome was. I am asking you whether or not YOU thought it was a good challenge. I am not asking whether a penalty was given, or whether Stuart Cummins thought it warranted any action.

actually you didnt ask that.

I already explained that I thought Cummings explained it best. Coopers arm came up after contact so it wasnt a clear swinging arm. That said had he made contact he should have been punished but that wouldnt change the fact that initial contact was legal, and in the end there was no illegal contact at all.

It was careless, maybe reckless, but nothing actually happened, nobody got hit.

#107 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,223 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 10:38 AM

I don't think the cooper challenge was that bad, the swinging arm looked bad but it was being flung round behind Lomax to wrap him up - nothing more.

Wellens was more at fault for putting Lomax into that trap.

But the ref did miss a lot of high shots - Lomax took a nasty smack in the face from someone down one flank that was missed despite being utterly blatant

On the whole I do think it was Reffed differently - certainly the game was allowed to be VERY slow, Wire especially were allowed to spoil, almost every time turning the player over, pulling them to the floor etc after a call of held - I wonder if the first playoff game will see a ref penalising a defending team out of the game for 20mins for ruck infringements

#108 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,862 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 10:40 AM

Are you missing the point on purpose?

It doesn't matter what the outcome was. I am asking you whether or not YOU thought it was a good challenge. I am not asking whether a penalty was given, or whether Stuart Cummins thought it warranted any action.


Come off it Steve, there was nothing in the challenge at all.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#109 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,595 posts

Posted 31 August 2013 - 11:23 AM

I thought that was a very enjoyable game. It was a bit scrappy and the ruck was a mess but it was hard fought and there were some nice skilful moments.

 

I was impressed with both fullbacks, it's great to see how many young players have developed in that position over the last few years. I hope we see a similar level of development in British halfbacks now as that's an area that we could really use some improvement in.

 

Well done Warrington, that game has made me excited for the playoffs and the Wolves will surely fancy their chances. I don't think we're strong contenders this year, mostly due to our lack of halves, but you never know.

 

On a side note (and perhaps I should have started a new thread for this...) Eddie pointed out that Adam Swift has 13 tries in 13 games (it's 12 games according to the club website as of now). I find it intriguing that some of the current wingers in the league have such exceptional strike rates. I'm relying on Wikipedia for most of this information so apologies if any of it's incorrect but have a look at these numbers for a few memorable wingers from the recent past:

 

Darren Albert - 88 tries in 124 games for St Helens (2002-2006)

 

Brett Dallas - 89 tries in 156 games for Wigan (2000-2006)

 

Brian Carney - 42 tries in 101 games for Wigan (2001-2005)

 

Lesley Vainikolo - 149 tries in 152 games for Bradford (2002-2007)

 

Tevita Vaikona - 90 tries in 147 games for Bradford (1998 - 2004)

 

Compared to:

 

Josh Charnley - 103 tries in 95 games for Wigan

 

Ryan Hall - 149 tries in 176 games for Leeds

 

Joel Monaghan 80 tries in 84 games for Warrington

 

Those are perhaps the three best wingers playing in the league at present, but I would've thought that those named from yesteryear were of a similar standard, yet only Vainikolo's strike rate is on a par with them.

 

So why is it that these three have managed to rack up such impressive numbers? Has the game developed in such a way that it's easier to score out wide now? Is the general level of defence on the flanks lower so that it's easier to score there? Or is it simply that they really are that much better?

 

I know that all three players are fortunate enough to receive some brilliant service but then those I mentioned from the past played alongside some world class  halfbacks and centres. I'd be interested in hearing peoples' thoughts on this.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users