Just wondering why there is still so much negativity on here and amongst our fans?

Ok yesterday was a scrappy performance but still served up some fairly special moments and at the end of the day we are currently top of the league with second best points difference.

I’m not saying all is perfect but when you consider -

We have 2 new players in the spine of the team who still won’t fully have clicked with those around them.

Our squad is getting rotated with a great mix of both youth and experience all getting game time.

We are winning ugly when we need to.

The style of rugby has certainly improved in regards entertainment.

It’s a long season and you don’t win trophies in Feb/March and we look more suited to the drier tracks.

I come on here and read some posts and I wonder what people are expecting?!

Has the 80’s and 90’s success ruined fans expectations for a generation?

On the face of things, we are having a great start to the season with I think plenty more to come.

Personally I just don’t understand why there is so much negativity.

I appreciate there are issues however not to warrant the level of negativity that seems to be floating around the club from a section of some fans.

It's because we're not fully convinced by Lam.

I started the season with a very negative outlook, but have been getting more positive as we've been playing better. Then Lam rotates our front row and we look bad against a bad team at home.

I’ve just posted on another thread about how I’ll quote gladly throw positives around when they’re there to be given but equally I won’t hold back on the negatives which are clear and consistently still clear too.

The season has gone well so far, one loss and 11 tries conceded is a great start so credit where it’s due absolutely. But I can’t help but feel that the starting props and 7 made us weaker yesterday, something which was pointed out too before the game even kicked off. If we as fans can see the obvious; why can’t Lam?

This rotating forwards waffle is just ridiculous too. Are we really rotating? IMO no; Oli and Bryne have played in every game, Havard all but one, Clubb (up until yesterday) all games. Bullock and Clarke have played twice putting in good performances too. Rotation? Come off it. There’s something else going on there. FWIW I’m not complaining about any of the younger lads playing - they fully deserve their selection, but so does Bullock.

Smith should be starting half with Tommy back up 9. His presence on the field makes a huge difference compared to when Tommy is on. We look stronger, more fluent, more threatening and more direct. When Tommy is there we look the opposite. I feel there is an air of sentiment going on there as opposed to the team first.

We have played well (in the main), that is utterly undeniable. French, Hastings and Powell have been superb, long may that continue. We do play rugby better than we did under Wane too, we have freedom to play what we see rather than play the set structure/play. It’s exciting to watch and creates tries like Hastings’ wonder try after French’s break.

There’s pros and cons to Lam but I wasn’t convinced at all by Lam last season and I’m still not now, though admittedly the better we play (win or lose) the more I will be. At present I wouldn’t be sad to see him leave at the end of the season as I don’t think he will lead us to silverware but I’m always open for that to change.

I hope I don’t come across as negative, it’s not what I’m going for. I’m trying to stay level headed rather than overly positive or negative.

It's weird but, all along, I had a feeling that this might prove a banana skin game for us.

I'll never know why but, in recent years, we rarely seem to cut loose in these 'lesser' fixtures the way others do. Saints are out of sorts at present, but ordinarily they'd put 50 points on a team like Hull KR at home. In contrast, we always seem to make heavy weather of it.

However, we still won reasonably comfortably despite not functioning in high gear, so there are no complaints there.

We've got another possible banana skin on the horizon in Salford away. Now, folk may laugh at that, but Salford will fancy it after the way they demolished us last year, plus the return of Hastings will add spice. I'd be surprised if Salford didn't have a real go at us, so we can't afford any complacency.

I assume that's why we've rotated the front row, irritating though it was given how successful it was the week before.

It could simply be that Lammy is responding realistically to a tight couple of weeks where there is a degree of uncertainty. His comments that 'it was ugly but I'll take the win' seem to back that up.

It was the nature of yesterday's performance, just seemed a massive step back against let's be honest, an almost HKR reserve team who if they hadn't bombed 3 guilt edged chances in the second half could've really embarrassed us.
We just seemed flat from minute one and barely picked up, for me Havard's performance was the only thing to get positive about.
I posted on one of the FB pages that at the end of the game it felt liked we'd lost and I've got a bucket full of abuse about it but I stand by it.
As 100% Warrior said, leaving our best metre maker out Bullock is just mind boggling and continuing to pick Leuluai at half back is just killing us, if he's sharing the 9 role with Powell for the rest of the season then fine but he shouldn't be anywhere near the HB role.
I thought before the season started we were a half back short and I'd be loathe to put the pressure of being a starting half on Smith's shoulders but he's by a mile our best option at the moment.
There's a bloody good team in that squad somewhere and Lam needs to find it, for me next week
French
Manfredi
Hardaker
Hankinson
Marshall
Hastings
Smith
Partington
Powell
Burgess
Isa
Farrell
Smithies

Bullock
Byrne
Havard
A.N. Other (either Leuluai or another prop)

It's the nature of these forums that they tend to be more negative than positive. I'm not entirely sure why. There are always far more posts after a poor display than after a good one. Even when we have a good one some people will look for negatives. The "we're not missing Lockers" posts after the Huddersfield game was a prime example. I haven't seen the corresponding "we missed Lockers" ones after yesterday's performance when it's clear as day we did. I guess that's the nature of people.

On to the game itself. I'm not sure you can read too much into it. It was one of those games that never got started. They happen sometimes. The ref's influence on the flow of the game was far too great and, coupled with some misguided (in my opinion) selections we could not get any sort of roll on. That said, we were still comfortable winners and never really looked like losing so, if you want a positive to take from the game, I guess it would be that one.

I mentioned in another thread that I didn't feel the Partington/Byrne starting partnership was the one to get us over our slow starts and I saw nothing yesterday to change my mind. I also agree that Smith should have been on much earlier than he was. Both easy fixes so let's hope Lam does just that.

The season so far has been enjoyable. We're 5 from 6, 2 points clear at the top of the table with plenty of improvement in us. Hands up who would have taken that at the start of the season.

Partington has played all six, Clubb and Byrne have played five, Havard, Burgess and Bullock have played three, Clark has played two and Flower one.

Personally, I still see the same issues as last season and that is a young pack that are all being asked to play together. Burgess and Clark were signed to improve that and so far, one looks a shadow of the player we thought we were buying and the other can't get a game.

I think we lose to Warrington 13 v 13. We lost to Cas and last weeks win over Hudds was a game in which we struggled until the sin bin. We struggled against Toronto for the most part and the same again yesterday. Our best display so far was against Hull in a game I thought we would lose.

We are now winning those tight games as Lam said which last season we probably wouldn't have done, but when the big games come around we can't afford to have a pack that is struggling to get a footing in the game. We can't expect Havard, Byrne, Partington and Smithies to carry the pack all season and Hastings and French can't produce magic every week

Nothing is won at the start of March. As long as we keep picking up wins and we peak in July-September then I'll be happy.

I was going to say pretty much the same thing. I thought the ref was very poor and some of the penalties were not fathomable. Particularly the one where one of their players without the ball set off and just ran into a couple of our players and he blew up. The 10m was often 5m particularly when the ball was turned over.



I'd agree about Smith coming on earlier as well. I lost my temper when TL kicked the ball out in the full. It was the last straw on what was a very poor performance from him.

Lam said after the match sometimes you need to win ugly and last season this is the kind of game we may have lost. I don't disagree but now I am looking to see what his selection will be for Friday v Salford. If at least one of Bullock and Clark don't figure with a short five day turnaround I think any notion of Lam rotating the squad can be put to bed. This is exactly when rotation is the right thing to do.

I don't think any of these observations are negative. As we are winning they are nice problems to be discussing on a forum which is what they are for.

It was certainly a step back from the two previous weeks but you’re not going to be on top form every week. I’m another who still has doubts on Lam and most of that is down to selection. I don’t think he’s picked what I’d consider his strongest available 17 yet or he’s certainly not put it in the order I’d consider to be his strongest but when he’s got close we’ve put in our best performances. If he’s brave enough to make some tough calls then we could do something this year.

Negativity?... Nope, never seen that...

Indeed Dave. The one you refer to above was completely bizzarre. I know we often criticise the linesmen for not doing enough but yesterday saw the complete opposite. I thought Hicks in particular was giving some very poor advice and, if I'm not mistaken, that one was one of them.

I agree that there's a difference between discussion and negativity. You need the latter to have the former in any meaningful sense. I just think that balance is too often overlooked. There are almost always two sides to every story and multiple ways to interpret the same set of observations. My problem (if that's the right word) is with posters who see everything through an unrelentingly negative lens. I've pointed out many times over the years how easy it is to take a balanced view if you make the effort.

At Salford Lam needs to include Bullock if only to show he wasn't 'dropped' against KR. Ideally he'll include him because he sees his worth, particularly going forward. It's chalk and cheese how much better our backs go behind a pack moving forward. We also need to get past these slow starts so an opening prop combination that can achieve this needs to be found and fast. A slow start against the likes of Saints and we may not have the luxury of winning it in the second half. The game last year at Langtree was over by then.

Just watched the highlights back on the Super League Show. Hull KR’s first try and Brierleys try; where was French? The breaks didn’t look particularly speedy and I’d have thought he’d be able to get back?

Not a criticism of French, just an observation. Obviously I wasn’t there and the TV shot only shows the break rather than the full field and thus French’s position at the time and any attempt to get back.

Their first try was a breakaway if i remember rightly? French was in the attacking line. Same with Brierleys i believe, he was on one of the wings.

It was Frenchs pass that was intercepted for the 1st try. For Brierlys try French and Manfredis were having a "discussion" on the right wing. Manfredis had French in support on the break but chose not to use him. Powell threw the slack pass which was picked up by Brierley.

I look forward to Gilly being back for this reason. How many times has he ran back, sometimes from across the over side of the field and stopped a try.

I hate to think what it would be like if we never had any success like most of the other clubs!

Be a lot better, remember how everybody rallied round in the relegation dogfight year, by a mile the best atmosphere the DW's seen.

That’s fair enough - like I said, I’m not criticising and I wasn’t there so I didn’t get the full picture, though I’m led to believe for Brierleys try he was ‘talking’ to Manfredi about a pass he never received. He’ll learn from that I’m sure and I’d be a liar if I said I’d never done it before either!

It was a shocking pass by Powell, not for the first time.

It was a shocking pass to him as well, with him catching it above his head. We really need to improve our basics in those situations. There are too many times when we try and open up and move the ball and passes aren’t hitting the mark.

I agree there. If we look at Saints or the Roosters; part of the reason they have been so successful is because of their pinpoint passing accuracy and consistency in their slick movement of the ball. We are an improving - and let’s not forget, quite a young team. I can let things like this go. Let’s be fair it’s not all the time it happens it’s more of a here and there error which can happen to all teams too. As the team grows, ages and develops so will this aspect of our game.

We also throw in that we’ve been completely broken down and rebuilt again as a team attacking style gives rise to letting it go too IMO.

It’s been something that has aggravated me for a good while and that across the league, not just at Wigan. I’ve always felt the big difference between us and the Aussies in close games are just the basics. They’re forced to concentrate and trained to nail their skills under pressure by playing in a league that is tough and doesn’t give you many minutes off. That phase of play had Manfredi not playing a simple ball to French (certainly the real weak link of Manfredi’s game) and then two horrendous passes, which resulted in the opposition breaking away and scoring.

I get your point but "Saints" and "so successful" is an oxymoron. They've won one major trophy in 5 years!