Jump to content

EagleEyePie

Coach
  • Posts

    793
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by EagleEyePie

  1. Straightforward that call. Ipape's forward movement means the defender can't get to Mellor and Mellor makes contact with Ipape going over. Won't stop people calling it an injustice or inconsistent though.
  2. That's probably the wrong outcome for the Hall try as it looked like Mellor had his arm underneath, but it was weak play to turn over the ball and weak defending to allow Hall to get over the line. If Leigh had defended better that marginal call never has to be made, but it will be the officials who 'robbed' Leigh if that turns out to be decisive when there was ample opportunity to prevent Hall even crossing the line.
  3. I think this is the logical take when it comes to analysing the outcome of games. You can't control the calls a referee makes, but you can prevent tries being conceded. There were two tries that Leigh could have prevented but didn't which had a greater bearing on the outcome of that game. If you'd played a near perfect game and then the ref made an incorrect call that cost you the points you might be entitled to be upset, but that would probably also require the opposition to have played a near perfect game too. If Wigan had lost that game then plenty of Wigan fans and possibly myself included would have still bemoaned the obstruction call against us and it not being called obstruction against French but the reality is we failed at things we could control. As much as Lam might never have reached Field the fact is Nsemba's run was too close to the outside shoulder and allowed Lam to initiate contact. That's a mistake and something the team can control. The Gildart no-try was a stroke of luck for us but we should never have allowed them to be in that position. The Lam try came from a defensively mistake from Nsemba and a poor tackle attempt from French. If the Gildart try had stood you should point the finger of blame at the poor defending for the Lam try rather than any perceived mistake by the official. It's like when teams make a clean break, 2 on 1 with the fullback and the final pass is forward but the try is given and the fans and maybe even coach howl with outrage. That's blaming the ref for bad luck. Everyone knows in that situation a try will be scored unless the attacking team messes up. You can't control that final pass, you can't control whether the other team mess up, what can't be disputed is they shouldn't have been allowed into a position where the only thing preventing a try being scored is the attacking team making a mistake. Its not the refs fault, it's the fault of the players who allowed the attacking team to make the break.
  4. Slightly diverting the topic a little, but I feel like at some point we'll see the end of drop outs anyway, so there will have to be another method of restart for being tackled in the in-goal or knocking the ball dead. Even collisions that don't result in contact with the head can contribute to concussions and drop outs are one of those situations that lead to significant impacts with carries of up to 20m directly into onrushing defenders. It's hard to work around kick offs, but drop outs can be more easily avoided. I wonder if we'll soon see scrums given for grounding the ball or knocking it dead. A tap restart would seem a bit bland.
  5. Well this has been an entertaining thread. I feel like I've turned up right as the party's over. For what it's worth I'll give my opinion. Derek Beaumont's comments don't exactly reflect well on him and come across as a very immature. Arguments like 'other club owners would have done the same' are ridiculous whataboutery. Some have made similar comments in the past and have been called out on them (the example of McManus has already been used). Some will probably make similar comments in the future and will be called out on them. Saying "you'd probably say X too" doesn't mean saying "X" is okay. This idea that it was some great injustice and who could blame someone for being upset. I don't buy it. It was an incident that happened with nearly half an hour of the game still to play. There was still plenty of time left to decide the game. It was a game that decided whether Leigh finished 4th or 5th. This wasn't a situation that ended their season, or decided a cup final, or saw them relegated, it decided whether they play at home or away. If that is the benchmark for such outbursts we're going to be seeing them a lot more frequently from now on. It was one of a vast number of harsh calls throughout the year that played a part in deciding the outcome of games but were not the single deciding factor (because one incident never is). Having said that, people can get very personal about stuff like this but ultimately I don't think it's a massive issue. Derek Beaumont has mentioned his mental health issues previously and I don't want to start speculating on anyone's wellbeing but impulsiveness and difficulty controlling emotions are pretty common traits for a variety of mental health conditions. Things get said in the heat of the moment, people get carried away. Just because some people find it easy to control what they say doesn't mean everyone does. I don't think it necessarily says that much about a person in isolation and I don't know the guy. I do know some really nice people who come out with some absolutely ludicrous stuff after a pint or two when angry or frustrated. Give them a load of money and an RL club to run they'd be just like DB. Basically, what he said comes across as a immature, he's probably going to get punished for it by the RFL but it's hardly a massive scandal.
  6. I agree that Rowley is a bit fortunate to be one of the contenders. Willie Peters seems a more obvious choice and I'm not sure if the World Club Challenge actually gets taken into account for something like this but there's an argument for Wellens to be on there for winning that and then finishing level on points with the league leaders. Lam should definitely win it though. It's unprecedented for a promoted team to have achieved what Leigh have this season and they are more than capable of making it to the Grand Final too.
  7. How would a "Why not both?" approach actually be implemented? Would it apply all the time or on a case by case basis? There's definitely logic in having bans that apply to the level you're playing at but it still means someone could play in the reserves grand final, commit an offence that's worthy of several matches and be able to turn up in the SL grand final the following week. It also means a player could pick up a lengthy ban in the reserves and join a team that doesn't have a reserve side and never have to serve the suspension. If the approach is to ban players for senior games and reserve games that means reserve games could still counting towards the suspension doesn't it? Perhaps bans in reserves fixtures should count for both reserve (U19 if eligible) and first team games, while first team bans only count for first team games? Though that still leaves the issue of a player getting a 5 match ban in the first team and playing every week for the U19's or reserves for the rest of the year without serving the suspension. I'm still banging the drum for only players outside the top 25 on the cap being allowed to use reserve games for suspensions, and top 25 players not being able to feature for the reserves if suspended. It might provide a slight benefit to a young player who has a strong season and makes the first team unexpectedly but it's unlikely to happen, given how infrequently this situation arises over the course of a year. In the current situation it would mean none of Wigan's 3 suspended players would be eligible for the semi final (which seems right) and they also couldn't just feature in the reserve grand final for the sake of it.
  8. Your last sentence is a question I've already answered so I don't know why you've asked it. The first doesn't solve the problem. The onus shouldn't be on clubs in that situation. Just suspend players for the next games they are reasonably expected to take part in. In this case, French would miss the semi final and not a game he would never have taken part in anyway.
  9. I remember Cas benefitting from this rule last season when they faced us. Liam Watts had been given a 2 match ban but missed 1 game + a reserves game and was free to play against us. I also think Wakefield benefitted from it this year. One of their players (Liam Hood I think) picked up a 1 match ban that was served with a reserves game.
  10. Probably not that simple, as it means a fringe player could be called up to the first team, commit a really serious offence that gets them an 8+ match ban and just continue playing for the reserves for the rest of the year. Sure, they'd eventually have to serve the suspension but it would be a bad look for the sport if they were still playing the following week. I think a smaller tweak to the rules would be enough, such as only those outside of a clubs top 25 salary capped players being able to use reserves games towards suspensions. It means those that would usually play for the reserves or even U19's would still serve their suspensions immediately. It is of course a ridiculous loophole that should have been fixed years ago and when it happens at such a crucial time of the year it reflects badly on the RFL's disciplinary processes.
  11. It was needless, but didn't James Harrison escape a ban for this offence earlier this year as they deemed the contact unnecessary but passive as he was asking for attention? No idea what the usual punishments are for this offence these days or how they grade them. It's not comparable to Vaughan's offence (harsh as that outcome was).
  12. That was the sort of game I was hoping for from a Wigan perspective. We've had it a bit easy in recent weeks and it's not a reflection of what playoff games are usually like. Last night was much closer to what we would expect for a semi-final and I think it highlighted some areas we need to work on, which is massively important at this time of year. I thought both teams showed their strengths in different areas. For me the Leigh pack was much stronger overall. I don't think our front row was as dominant as it has been in previous games and Amone and Mulhern were head and shoulders above our middle players. I thought tactically we got it right and played to our strengths. Smith and French put in some outstanding kicks even if they were kept quiet through our inability to dominate down the middle of the field. As for the ruled out tries, in an ideal world both would be given. For the Wigan try Lam initiates contact as Nsemba goes through and is playing for the obstruction call. He trails an arm to make it seem more obvious but for me if the defender initiates contact it should be play on. For the Leigh try I do have some sympathy for the video ref. The call basically hinges on whether O'Donnell runs at French's chest or the outside shoulder (regardless of how much contact there is) and arguably he runs at the left side of the chest and the outside shoulder. He's directly in the path of French and O'Brien when contact is made. The referee's on field call of no try means he probably got that right in terms of evidence to overturn, but everyone who loves the games knows French isn't significantly impeded by the contact and it should be a try. People shouldn't be too critical of the video ref, it's the on field call that causes most of these problems. Also, since the season proper is now over, well done Leigh on an incredible year. Team of the year and Lam is coach of the year without a shadow of a doubt. For all the mockery of the Leopard print (no, it will never not look tacky) the rebrand and the building of a strong squad has been a success.
  13. Really looking forward to this game and seeing how the Catalans and Saints games go. I know it's not the biggest prize but 3 teams fighting for top spot and maybe 1st place changing hands a few times generates a bit of excitement when watching any sport. It's a strange situation because Wigan are favourites due to points difference and the fact that the top 3 are all favourites to win their game, but we're also by far the more likely to lose considering the opposition we face away from home. The fact we've beaten Leigh comfortably in the previous 2 games counts for very little in my opinion. Worst case scenario would probably be an easy win, as I don't think the week off helps us and not having a tough game prior just makes things worse. It certainly didn't help last year when we had reasonable form at the end of the season, battered a weak Catalans side only to struggle to throw anything (except Bateman's shoulder) at Leeds in the semi final. I think the best outcome is a hard fought win where we have to rely on good game management. I still think our style of play can make us a big vulnerable when the sensible choice is to play it simple but there have been some positive signs in that area in recent weeks. A loss would be frustrating but maybe a late reality check wouldn't be the worst thing after some fairly comfortable victories in the last 4 games (in fact 6 of the last 7 have been fairly comfortable).
  14. It's really amateur stuff from the coaching team. It's the young players who have suffered and it's a horrible situation for them. Some of these academy players will have reached the age limit and won't carry on with the reserves next season so this could possibly be the last stage of their rugby league journey and it's been taken away from them. No blame goes to anyone other than the coaching team on the day. It's their responsibility. 12 subs haven't been allowed since about 2010, and John Duffy has had enough experience as a head coach to be able to count subs. I don't know what they could do but I hope the club makes some gesture to the academy players to try to make amends.
  15. Miski should make the Dream Team for sure this year. I get it, there's lots of competition and Johnstone is nailed on for one place, but for me Miski pips both Charnley and Makinson in terms of consistency of high level performance, he's just flown under the radar because as you mentioned, he only got into the side during round 7 so wasn't high up in the scoring charts until now. He's been outstanding and it's not like he only scores walk-ins plus he's created quite a few tries for others. Nsemba is such a great talent. There aren't many young players who are as strong in the carry and it's not like he's a chunky player or a big bruiser, he's lean and athletic but physical enough to make good metres and strong in the tackle. Can't wait to see how he develops but I hope his friendship with KPP doesn't turn his eyes to the NRL before we see the best of him. Cas really didn't offer much aside from a good spell where we seemed to lose focus after an error by Field. Given they weren't mathematically safe from relegation at the start of the game Cas really lacked any sort of fight which probably says a lot about why they are 11th.
  16. I think with Farrell it's been a deliberate effort not to go 100% right from the start of the year. It's what he usually does but he's had a history of picking up injuries towards the end of the year and that often costs us in the playoffs. I think he's been picking up form recently and is hopefully in good shape to play at his best. Byrne and Mago have gone from being our weakest props to our strongest props and that's made a huge difference. Byrne in particular seems to be carrying the ball much better than he did even just a month or two ago. I think there were about 3 occasions where he went into contact and knocked the defender to the ground and is finally making the impact you'd expect for someone of his size. Overall I thought it was a good performance from Wigan but the game was nothing special. Salford did defend quite well at times and their line speed was decent but they just didn't have enough quality in the pack. Hardly surprising when they line up with Singleton and Partington in the front row. Wigan fans are all too aware of their limitations and I thought Singleton in particular was just as poor as he has been for most of his time in Cherry and White. There were some entertaining tries at least. The try on half time was a bit of a howler and just goes to show what can happen if you switch off. It was obviously just a kick and hope so 3 players in the middle of the field chased the kick and ended up overrunning it and no one was focused on defending a kick return. You'd never do that in any other situation but because it was the last play they lost the plot. I understand why the rules are the way they are but I think I counted 3 penalties awarded for lifting a player into a dangerous position where the player was never actually in a dangerous position which is frustrating when watching. All things considered a decent result for Wigan. Salford just seem a bit too inconsistent at present.
  17. I was impressed with the performance from Wigan but also have to acknowledge that Catalans were a long way from their best. Who knows what the reason for Catalans poor performance was but what I certain of is that if we play then again it's going to be a much harder games, so I'm under no illusions that this game will have much of a bearing on what happens come the playoffs. I did think Wigan had a hand in forcing Catalans to play poorly. Our defence was probably the best its been all year in the early stages where we coped well with the forwards. The Wigan pack looked comfortable and French and Smith had the ability to make an impact on the game. French has come in for a lot of criticism from Wigan fans but some of it just seems like confirmation bias. When our attack doesn't fire it's always because French isn't a 6 and it's bad for the team. We average more points per game with French at 6 than when others play there. He's a makeshift half due to the poor performances of others in that role and in that context his performances have been outstanding. One of the things that must have come up in the preparation for this game is Tomkins trying to influence the ref at every stoppage and not allowing him to do it. Farrell seemed to enjoy making sure Tomkins didn't get the chance to talk by himself and he got more rattled as the game went on. Not the classic encounter that I think most would have hoped for but I think that's the way things go in this competition. There are a lot of evenly matched teams but they don't necessarily play at their best when they face each other so you can get one sided scores either way.
  18. I'm not sure that logic holds up. You already seem to have identified the reason for crowds being better at that time. The marketing was very effective. If it was purely down to loop fixtures our attendances against newly promoted teams would always be higher than the norm because that fixture won't have been played as often so loop fixtures can't have killed the anticipation. Also, while our best attendances against Warrington came during a period of time where there were 14 teams in SL and no loop fixtures the decline in attendances happened before loop fixtures were introduced. 2014 was the season when attendances for Wire home games went from being 20,000 and above to around 15,000 and then declined further in line with average attendances from that point. The marketing (the 'Big One' games) stopped being effective and nothing seemed to replace it. We all know loop fixtures aren't preferred, but I just don't see any logic in removing two home fixtures and reducing income at what is relatively short notice given clubs are already selling season tickets and in a tough economic climate with no suggestion of what would replace them. Clubs will have already budgeted and planned their squad around expected income for next season. Pretty much every UK or European competition that has a small number of teams encounters this issue, and the need to play enough fixtures to be financially viable without damaging the product through repetitiveness. I believe the Scottish Premiership currently has 3 fixtures against the same team then 1 more against each top 6 or bottom 6 club depending on where they finish. Every competition has to play enough games to be financially viable while fitting it into the calendar. Sometimes it seems the argument for everything is that clubs should just do more. If loop fixtures are removed then clubs should just do more to make that money back from the other home games. If it was really that simple it wouldn't be an issue. No one actively wants to lose money. The IMG recommendations are designed to get the sport to where it needs to be but that doesn't mean everything they recommend has to be implemented immediately regardless of potential impact. It's a 12 year partnership. Also the headlines of 'SL ignoring key recommendation' probably don't reflect IMG's own understanding of the reasons why clubs voted not to ditch loop fixtures for next season. There will be open communication and discussions. The aim of the partnership is to get clubs into a position where loop fixtures aren't required. Actively voting to lose income just doesn't make much sense and there's absolutely no evidence to suggest ditching loop fixtures is going to have a positive effect on finances. In the long term it would be beneficial in streamlining the competition but you have to balance it with the short term financial impact too.
  19. As a few others have said, I don't really see the issue here. Clubs are now receiving less than before despite going from two televised games per week to every game televised per week. There's a chance that there will be an impact here on attendances that needs to be assessed and considered. It's going to be easier than ever before for fans to stay at home and watch rather than attending games. If clubs had the option to charge a fee to fans to watch the game at home that's not an issue, but broadcasting it free on the channel most fans already subscribe to isn't going to increase matchday revenue which is still a big source of income for clubs. (It's also still a major source of income for football clubs despite the huge TV rights deals - although it's mostly corporate hospitality that makes the money). Then you consider that most clubs have specifically chosen the day/night they play matches to maximise revenue and Friday nights seem to be the preference. It's certainly better for selling hospitality. With every game broadcast there's a chance that games no longer overlap meaning a team that usually plays Friday will be playing on Sunday for 6 home games in a row and that could have an impact too. And then there's the fact that clubs are already selling season tickets for next year. It's bad practice to have people renew and then decide they are getting fewer games for what they pay and that the typical schedule that's been followed for years is also changing. No one wants to be dealing with refunds. Essentially, there doesn't seem to be much evidence that loop fixtures are negatively affecting attendances. There's no obvious way for clubs to cover the loss in revenue in the short term given TV rights money is also dropping slightly. The broadcast deal is likely to result in a significant shift away from what fans are used to and it makes sense not to take unnecessary risks. There's not a lot of certainty at present so I'd argue it makes sense to stick with the fixture format until the broadcasting picture is a bit clearer. I don't think loop fixtures are high on the list of things that are negatively impacting our sport.
  20. You haven't seen his other attempts! That was the hardest one and I think all Wigan fans had given up hope by this point. Seriously, who do I speak to if I want to get those last two hours of my life back? Not only was that a terrible advert for golden point it was a terrible advert for rugby league in general. Just painful to watch and if there was ever a game that you didn't want to go to golden point it was this one. I have no idea what Wigan's tactics were in the first half. Maybe the idea was to try to put points on the board early while the weather was dry because the rain would make things grind to a halt but basically Wigan spent the first 20 minutes making some wild choices in attack and turning the ball over on the 1st or 2nd tackles trying to make things happen seemingly oblivious to the idea of keeping hold of the ball and making the opposition work hard in defence. Our front row actually stood up quite well and make good ground. It wasn't a game where we struggled in the forwards which is often the case. We'd make good metres, get some good position and throw it away trying something that wasn't really on. I've rarely seen a team have so much territory but make the defence do so little work. I can only assume it's partly the Briers influence. If you watch Brisbane their style of attack is quite high risk. They rarely go for repeat sets and seem to try to score with every set. They can do that and be successful because they are a good team. Wigan on the other hand would do well to just play the low risk play and take the ball into the corner once in a while rather than trying to score on every play because most of the time it doesn't work. Rather than throwing it wide on tackle 2 just play a conservative set or two. Fortunately the second half was a little bit better, though the weather was horrendous so it was still turgid. Then I had to watch golden point and 5 minutes of Wigan failing spectacularly at setting up a drop goal despite being camped on the Hull line for a lot of it.
  21. Well done Leigh. What a story this season has been so far. Both teams played their part in an entertaining final. I didn't really have a preference for who would win because as a kid the first time I had a favourite player it was Willie Peters and my all time favourite player is Adrian Lam. It was great to see them both competing in a final as coaches 22 years later. This was also my 'oh my god I'm getting old' moment so I'm glad I could share it. Beaumont, Chester, Lam, the playing group and everyone else behind the scenes has helped to create something really special for the fans. An iconic moment that they will never forget. The way things are going I'm fairly confident they won't have to wait as long for more success. Hull KR have been building something good too. It was very nearly their story but it wasn't to be. I hope all the fans that travelled to Wembley enjoyed their day.
  22. How long did that decision have to take? It was obvious it came off Hardaker about 10 minutes ago.
  23. Am I right in thinking when Powell arrived at Wire he was quite critical of the playing group? I certainly got the impression (though it may have been through insinuation) that when players like Hill, Charnley, Hughes, Cooper, King etc were shown the door it was because they were deemed to be an issue. It just seems a bit odd considering Hill instantly made an impact at Huddersfield and was better than any prop Wire retained. Charnley has been playing well since leaving and is now playing some of his best rugby. Cooper was ditched mid-season and Wire actually asked Wigan to sign him. He ended the season as Wigan's best prop and there's not been a hint of any attitude issues. King has been really good for Wigan, and despite a brief dip in form his reaction to being dropped for the Saints game was exceptional. It doesn't really seem like getting rid of bad apples. Wire don't seem to have that many long-serving players anymore. Philbin, Currie, Clark and Ratchford have been around a while but Philbin and Currie haven't really fulfilled their potential. Ratchford has been moved to a position that I'm not sure really suits him so he can't have much influence. There's only Daryl Clark who is an established player in an influential position and he's leaving. I'd have thought trying to rebuild the club around some experienced heads who have been at the club long term would be the way forward.
  24. I thought the most noticeable thing was the drop off in quality from Amone and Mulhern to Nakubuwai and Wilde. I thought the starting props were a little stronger than Wigan's, but all 4 of our props were much better than Leigh's interchange, so even with one of the starting props on the field we still had the edge. It's an issue Wigan have struggled with at times this season but the arrival of Dupree and the upturn in the form of Mago has really made a difference. Against Leigh there was no usual drop off in performance when Ellis left the field, our bench actually performed better. I do think Ipape was a big miss, and O'Donnell too.
  25. I know this is from an official club press release, but I can't believe this is true until the '5 coaches who could replace Daryl Powell' article appears.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.