Dunbar

I'm impressed at the speed in which our forum members can digest, analyse and review a financial report. Some next generation Warren Buffet's here.

I have attempted to pay for this 3 times now, one for monthly subscription and twice for the annual one. Each times it goes all the way through to a successful validation on the HSBC banking app.... then 5 minutes later it stops and tells me it has failed. It is the only on-line payment that has failed in the last 5 years as far as I can remember. But I will persevere.

Really, that's just ridiculous to just make up the laws for a game... having multiple laws for different competitions is bad enough without teams asking for a law to be added for a game. I hope the fact it was penalised means they were told to do one.

The international laws of Rugby League state that 'where two or more playersare effecting the same tackle - irrespective of whether all but one “drops off” the tackle, and the ball is subsequently taken from the tackled player, a penalty will be awarded against the player or players effecting the tackle.'

I think this is a fair result. It is clear that the referees are being instructed to treat initial head on head contact as reckless and if their was no mitigation (i.e. a ball career lowering himself into the tackle) then a penalty or worse. But they have recognised that this secondary contact was accidental and will look change the wording and the guidance, we can’t really expect more than that.

So is a colonoscopy.

Not bad.

There were people on here saying he wasn't the right man for the job and that Wigan needed transformation and improvement that only comes with fresh ideas from Australia. I am so glad that Peet has lived up to his potential as a coach and proved those who questioned his appintment wrong.

It is fair to say that he doesn't have the on field experiences of O'Loughlin and Leuluai yes. And do I think having a mix of experiences is good. Yes. But I think your post does, to a degree, lean into my wider point which is that we don't find as many Matty Peet's in the game as we should because we place far too much value on the playing experiences of developing coaches and not their potential as a coach. It's not just Rugby League either, I think most sports make this mistake. Even when Peet was being mooted as the next head coach of Wigan there were people questioning his appointment. And more so than say a Sam Burgess at Wire despite Peet having much more experience in coaching overall. Again because playing ability is given too much weight in coaching ability. And I am not being critical of you here, I hope you don't take it that way.

I wasn't reading your post as any kind of criticism of Peet and mine are certainly not any criticism of O'Loughlin or Leuluai and their contribution. I agree with your wider premise on the make up of teams and I have made my (very specific) point a couple of times on the thread now so I won't restate it.

I'm sure it is a move in their repertoire that they decided to execute after studying the way the Panthers line up in defence of a scrum. Good coaching and just a tiny fraction out in execution.

Nobody is ignoring Leuluai and O'Loughlin's skills and experience. And no-one is undermining their contribution. But to say they construct the Wigan game plan is wide of the mark. As Liam Farrell said after last years Grand Final in praise of Peet... “He makes tough calls when they’re needed, he puts the game plan into place". https://www.impartialreporter.com/sport/national/23856866.triumphant-wigan-boss-matt-peet-aims-emulate-coaching-heroes/ And again, to be absolutely clear, I am not saying O'Loughlin or Leuluai can't do this, they are clearly very good coaches and may be very good head coaches one day. I have just one point on this thread. Matt Peet is a top class Rugby League coach and he didn't need to be a top class player to be a top class coach. He doesn't need people with 'rugby brains' to support him as that implies he doesn't have a rugby brain.

But haven't you just said the same thing with the '2 ex players have the experience of playing in those intense games and know what is required to win them' part of your post. Again, you are suggesting that their playing experience adds something that Peet lacks and I am disagreeing with that. I am not trying to persuade you or Damien of anything by the way, everyone is more than welcome to their opinion.

I don't want to misrepresent anyone. I read your 'rugby brains' and 'been there done that' comments about O'Loughlin and Leuluai as referencing their professional playing careers (which Peet didn't have). Did you mean something else?

Indeed and José Mourinho as well. All three outstanding managers. Then you have likes of Frank Lampard who was an excellent player but clearly out of his depth at managing. There are great players who make great coaches. I am simply saying that they have both attributes... great player and great coach but they do not have one because of the other. Peet is a perfect example of a Rugby League coach who is tactically very good and he didn't need to play at the top level to become tactically astute.

Why are you arguing then. Look, if you think that having the experience of a top class playing career adds value to your coaching credentials that is fine. I just disagree.

I asked you what you meant when you said Leuluai and O'Loughlin were "the brains" and you said "rugby brains. They've been there and done that".

I am not arguing the importance of O'Loughlin and Leuluai but you are suggesting that there are some elements of Rugby League game play or tactics that they possess that Peet doesn't because he wasn't a top class player. And I disagree with that view.

This goes back to my previous point that people think to have rugby brains you need to have been a top class player.

That's social media for you. It's a minefield of nonsense.

Just wondering what you mean that 'they are the brains'?

Agreed.

I was going to post that at the time but didn't want the thread to get derailed. I thought that was poor as the words were changed to respect the indigenous people of Australia, a few of which were in the Penrith side.

I guess that's the difference of being sent up a try or not. The laws state that the referee should not disallow a try because he was not in a position to see the grounding of the ball. But equally, if he didn't think the ball got to the line then he shouldn't award a try. If a ref thinks it got there and wants to check he send it up as a try. If he thinks it didn't and wants to check then he sends it up no try. I thought that decision was handled OK.

Hull?