Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Old Frightful

Tues 29th Sept SL : St Helens v Wigan Warriors KO 7:45pm SKY

Who will win?  

30 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • St Helens
      23
    • Wigan Warriors
      7


Recommended Posts

 

4 minutes ago, SL17 said:

Thrown in, not bloodied. You?

Throwing young players in never works.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2003/apr/19/rugbyleague.sthelens

Edited by Padge
  • Like 1

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SL17 said:

Gradual intergration. That’s just men against boys. Pathetic.

But that isn't the point you were making. You asked if being on the fringes made a SL player. I asked where else would you expect them to be.

You then went on to start a discussion about them being thrown into this game. Which point are you trying to make exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SL17 said:

You stated they were ready! Being on the fringes. Where they?

And still you avoid the question. Where else would you expect a potential SL player to be other than on the fringes of the first team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mr Frisky said:

You will never win anything with kids.

 

  • Like 1

"Men will be proud to say 'I am a European'. We hope to see a day when men of every country will think as much of being a European as of being from their native land." (Winston Churchill)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the rather one sided nature of the team line ups, I was cheering on the Pies tonight.

I didn't bother following this thread but my pal Ullman suggested I ought to have a look later on as there was an explosion of outrage about a Walmsley tackle.

I guessed, correctly it seems, that it was when the lad's kneecap popped out and back in again, but couldn't remember either myself or the other 5 guys I was watching the game with even commenting on it being a dangerous tackle at the time, and we were all rooting for Wigan.

I guess I'll just have to wait and watch it again or wait for the RFL Disciplinary to wade in with a lengthy ban for Walmsley.

Because at the moment, reading back comments posted on here from when it happened, the WDL look to have embarrassed themselves somewhat.

 

 

  • Like 3

                                                  "Son, can you play me a memory, I'm not really sure how it goes,

                                   but it's sad and it's sweet and I knew it complete, when I wore a younger man's clothes"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Old Frightful said:

Given the rather one sided nature of the team line ups, I was cheering on the Pies tonight.

I didn't bother following this thread but my pal Ullman suggested I ought to have a look later on as there was an explosion of outrage about a Walmsley tackle.

I guessed, correctly it seems, that it was when the lad's kneecap popped out and back in again, but couldn't remember either myself or the other 5 guys I was watching the game with even commenting on it being a dangerous tackle at the time, and we were all rooting for Wigan.

I guess I'll just have to wait and watch it again or wait for the RFL Disciplinary to wade in with a lengthy ban for Walmsley.

Because at the moment, reading back comments posted on here from when it happened, the WDL look to have embarrassed themselves somewhat.

 

 

And you still can't answer the question, can you.

The truth is that maybe they were ready, and maybe they weren't, but looking at some of the hidings dished out by Saints this year, they were more ready than Leeds, Huddersfield and Salford's first teams.

If you don't see anything wrong with that Walmsley tackle, then I guess we will have to see what the disciplinary come up with to see if you are correct in your view.

With regards to the embarrassment quip, I think you are definitely first team standard at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Old Frightful said:

Given the rather one sided nature of the team line ups, I was cheering on the Pies tonight.

I didn't bother following this thread but my pal Ullman suggested I ought to have a look later on as there was an explosion of outrage about a Walmsley tackle.

I guessed, correctly it seems, that it was when the lad's kneecap popped out and back in again, but couldn't remember either myself or the other 5 guys I was watching the game with even commenting on it being a dangerous tackle at the time, and we were all rooting for Wigan.

I guess I'll just have to wait and watch it again or wait for the RFL Disciplinary to wade in with a lengthy ban for Walmsley.

Because at the moment, reading back comments posted on here from when it happened, the WDL look to have embarrassed themselves somewhat.

 

 

I think Alex had to make the tackle. The player wasn't going down, the referee had not shouted held. He couldn't just stand there and let a potential offload develop.

I thought the late challenge on Laughlan Coote was far worse, that was done with malice and attitude. 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Old Frightful said:

Given the rather one sided nature of the team line ups, I was cheering on the Pies tonight.

I didn't bother following this thread but my pal Ullman suggested I ought to have a look later on as there was an explosion of outrage about a Walmsley tackle.

I guessed, correctly it seems, that it was when the lad's kneecap popped out and back in again, but couldn't remember either myself or the other 5 guys I was watching the game with even commenting on it being a dangerous tackle at the time, and we were all rooting for Wigan.

I guess I'll just have to wait and watch it again or wait for the RFL Disciplinary to wade in with a lengthy ban for Walmsley.

Because at the moment, reading back comments posted on here from when it happened, the WDL look to have embarrassed themselves somewhat.

 

 

You have completely missed the point that was being made, but never mind.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, SL17 said:

You resort to a link from 17 years ago.?

Christ I give up.

What has the year got to do with it?


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Niels said:

I think Alex had to make the tackle. The player wasn't going down, the referee had not shouted held. He couldn't just stand there and let a potential offload develop.

I thought the late challenge on Laughlan Coote was far worse, that was done with malice and attitude. 

 

 

 

You don't stop an off-load by busting somebody's knee cap, other than the player being tackled being put in so much pain that he may forget he was about to off-load.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for missing whatever the point was and apologies for not answering whatever the question was.

All I'm saying is that the group I was with tonight were all rooting for Wigan so if we'd thought Walmsley had committed a serious foul we would all have commented but nobody did. The Wigan fans on here were in outrage that nobody posted what an appalling foul it was and it would seem that the populous on here, Wigan fans aside, saw what we saw, a bad injury from a tackle that didn't seem to raise any disciplinary issues.

On the flip side, when Coote was hit by a late shot, I thought he absolutely milked it. "Direct contact to the head" I think I've read on here. He laid as though concussed until the penalty was awarded, then seemed absolutely fine.

If players want to feign a head injury, then let them be assessed off the pitch, not get straight up once they've got the penalty and carry on as though nowt's happened.


                                                  "Son, can you play me a memory, I'm not really sure how it goes,

                                   but it's sad and it's sweet and I knew it complete, when I wore a younger man's clothes"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tough game for the Wigan youngsters but they didn't let themselves down. I expected Saints to run away with it from the start but there was a decent period of that game where the scores were close and that was basically through them taking advantage of having an extra man.

Ben Kilner impressed me. He's had to wait a while for his chance given the number of good young forwards we have at the club but I think he's pushed himself ahead of the likes of Clark and Byrne with that performance. Ran the ball well and was really keen in defence.

Our young back rowers were good too. Harry Rushton might not have caught the eye with ball in hand but I thought he defended superbly against Zeb Taia, who is one of the best back row forwards in Super League. Kai Pearce-Paul looked a threat when he came on. The way he always looks for an offload is a promising sign that we could have a decent ball player on our hands.

Jack Wells was doing well too until his injury. It's a real shame for the lad as he missed all of last year with an ankle injury and had just forced his way back into the reckoning. A really good player on his day who deserves better luck.

Not outraged by the tackle that injured him as it wasn't deliberate but you'd expect a ban for that given what's come before. Smithies rightly got a lengthy ban for an accidental crusher on James Clare because he was careless and caused injury. Ben Flower got 2 games for taking his feet off the floor for 0.5 seconds before sliding down to complete a tackle in our game against Hull KR which caused no injury and puzzled many people. So Walmsley putting his shoulder into Wells' standing leg below the knee and causing an injury is surely more than a 2 game suspension. He's not done it deliberately but accidental foul play is being punished more severely. He shouldn't be making contact below the knee as 3rd tackler. Wigan have had plenty correctly banned for doing that and Walmsley should too.

I was impressed with Hanley despite a couple of errors. He was really peppered with high kicks which was to be expected given Saints dominated possession but didn't tear us apart until late on. Even experienced fullbacks drop them under that kind of pressure so I can't be too critical. He did well returning the ball and looked like he's got lots to offer.

While it was a day when the youngsters rightly receive a lot of praise I thought the importance of experience showed by how well we defended when Ben Flower was on the field. He got himself in the right place at the right time to make tackles and Saints didn't threaten as much when he was around to snuff out anything that hinted at a break. As soon as he left the field Saints picked off some weaknesses in our defence - particularly Byrne and Clark - and the points started racking up. We've got some really good young players but there's still the need for an old head.

It's never good to be beaten in a derby but the youngsters gave a good account of themselves, especially since many of them haven't played in 6 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

You dont appreciate the short turn round and then another game on Sat...?

(how come Walmsley was not sin binned there)

Wire did it but were 'only' playing Salford

I do, I understand the dilemma but I think he put young blokes out there who weren’t ready which IMO isn’t a good thing for a Head Coach. He’s choosing to potentially set back a young kid so as to have a better chance in a single game.

Maybe the Warrington lads as a group were more ready for the challenge, maybe Price got the mix of youth and experience right and yes, Salford aren’t Sts

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

Apologies for missing whatever the point was and apologies for not answering whatever the question was.

All I'm saying is that the group I was with tonight were all rooting for Wigan so if we'd thought Walmsley had committed a serious foul we would all have commented but nobody did. The Wigan fans on here were in outrage that nobody posted what an appalling foul it was and it would seem that the populous on here, Wigan fans aside, saw what we saw, a bad injury from a tackle that didn't seem to raise any disciplinary issues.

On the flip side, when Coote was hit by a late shot, I thought he absolutely milked it. "Direct contact to the head" I think I've read on here. He laid as though concussed until the penalty was awarded, then seemed absolutely fine.

If players want to feign a head injury, then let them be assessed off the pitch, not get straight up once they've got the penalty and carry on as though nowt's happened.

It was a violent challenge. Laughlan could well have been concussed.

It was very late with the shoulder. 

No player would be expected to get up straight away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Niels said:

It was a violent challenge. Laughlan could well have been concussed.

It was very late with the shoulder. 

No player would be expected to get up straight away.

Sorry but I didn't think it was either a violent challenge or very late. And if Coote could well have been concussed then the best place for him would be in the treatment room being assessed. But once the penalty and sin bin had been awarded, he carried on without any sort of issue.

That's how I saw it. As I've already said, I wanted Wigan to give a good account of themselves due to the number of young kids in the team but I didn't watch with any particularly coloured glasses on. (Perhaps I should have had some sort of glasses on!)

And I think they did go ok, plenty of teams will suffer one sided losses against Saints.

 


                                                  "Son, can you play me a memory, I'm not really sure how it goes,

                                   but it's sad and it's sweet and I knew it complete, when I wore a younger man's clothes"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the Wigan players acquitted themselves well in the circumstances.

I was struck by the oddness of the Wigan Twitter account posting 'IT DOESN'T GET BIGGER THAN THIS' when they had picked a team which openly recognised that they have a bigger game later in the week.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SL17 said:

Cheering on the pies tonight is just a disguise. God knows what Sky think of that.

SKY were stuck because of the fact that 4 teams were being forced to play midweek before a cup semi.  A Wigan Warrington reserves game would at least have been interesting.   

Wigan were a bit unlucky to have a player sin binned and Saints lucky to have one not sin binned (for a late charge down).  Otherwise the result might have been limited to 30 points deficit. But Wigan reserves had not properly trained... and does anybody remember "reserves"?  At least Wigan would have played together if there were reserve fixtures.  Wigan stuck to it but were just 13 players going through the basic motions. The main difference, apart from an organiser was the relative speed they went through their motions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jim Prendle said:

It’s amazing isn’t it? A really bad tackle that will put the young lad out for the season, and not one ounce of outrage on here.

if Flower had done that we would have already had a petition started for the death penalty.

I think, and im a Wigan supporter who regularly complains about Saints flopping, that its a moot point if its a foul.  But there are a lot of injuries with necks and knees.  My view is its the changed nature of game.

I think a wigan player got lifted in the tackle in 2nd half and saints player was penalised, but thinking back i don't think he was sin binned (?). That one was very dangerous.  

But there seems to be inconsistency by refs and the ref last night was not consistent, and im not really saying he is a bad referee... just at the game is very quick and mobile and elusive and that results in problematical tackles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

I think, and im a Wigan supporter who regularly complains about Saints flopping, that its a moot point if its a foul.  But there are a lot of injuries with necks and knees.  My view is its the changed nature of game.

I think a wigan player got lifted in the tackle in 2nd half and saints player was penalised, but thinking back i don't think he was sin binned (?). That one was very dangerous.  

But there seems to be inconsistency by refs and the ref last night was not consistent, and im not really saying he is a bad referee... just at the game is very quick and mobile and elusive and that results in problematical tackles. 

The consistency in the refereeing was frustrating. I’ve got no problems with the decisions made by Thaler but there was no consistency and awarding of the same decisions against either team last night. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

I think, and im a Wigan supporter who regularly complains about Saints flopping, that its a moot point if its a foul.  But there are a lot of injuries with necks and knees.  My view is its the changed nature of game.

I think a wigan player got lifted in the tackle in 2nd half and saints player was penalised, but thinking back i don't think he was sin binned (?). That one was very dangerous.  

But there seems to be inconsistency by refs and the ref last night was not consistent, and im not really saying he is a bad referee... just at the game is very quick and mobile and elusive and that results in problematical tackles. 

Was that the one when Lomax got sin binned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Click said:

Was that the one when Lomax got sin binned?

Yes... thanks fot that i remember now, he got sin binned... to be fair with him he looked a bit cressfallen.  

But it was a foul.  It was lazy, it was not particularly intentional, but was undisciplined and potentially dangerous.  It was the worst foul of the night. The point of these sort of penalties and suspensions is that it is intended to discipline and teach players not to do it. And I'm not getting at Lomax,  but he should get a suspension.  If he does not, then i think all Wigan fans will be very upset baring in mind Flower got 2 matches recently for what seemed innocuous. And Smithies got 6 lets not forget.

But overall one point I want to make is that we regularly see an attacker being 'carried'  for say 5 yards by 2 defenders and more as he walks forward and its hard to pull them down unless a 3rd man grabs his legs.  Well, knees do get twisted or worse in that situation. Obviously, the defender is intent on stopping the offload, but i begin to think we are finding consequences from this.  

Should the attackers be able to steal in the tackle?  This would force the defender to protect the ball more and encourage the ruck to form more quickly.

Here endeth the lesson, but i think we should discuss the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the standard is that Flower gets 2 matches for being in the wrong place and Smithies gets 6 for his misdemeanours, then Walmsley should get a long ban. He was third man in, tackled low, twisted the leg and Wells has suffered a bad injury (after having recovered from multiple bad injuries). I am not even sure it is controversial to suggest it - anyone who cares to can take another look at what lead to Flower’s 2 match ban. 
 

As to the benefit of a game like that, I am really not sure there is one for anyone, save that this is another game played on Sky that helps pay the rent. I doubt any Wigan player will have learnt anything very much other than Saints’ first team is far better than their reserves. Seeing a young player in that context is a long way removed from how that same player may look slotted into a strong side. This was all about Lam realising that his future at the club is on the line on Saturday (no pressure, mate). 

Edited by Exiled Wiganer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...