Huddersfield, who made us look ridiculous only a few games ago..how times change eh!

Overall I enjoyed the game especially being back at the ground as despite being relatively few in number the atmosphere was decent.

Other than that it was pretty much as expected we were rusty they were poor and Hicks gave us nothing for an hour then tried to even it up.

Hope Thewliss is OK it didn't look great but head wounds and claret can often be more dramatic once attended to.

One gripe and all teams do it including us but Wigan are the masters at mucking about at every PTB a quick clean one is as rare as hen's teeth. Frustrating to watch and not a great advert for the game.

He's fine for Sunday, thankfully. After a few stitches and a bit of 'character' added to his face . . .

I enjoyed the game 6 out of 10. I enjoyed the Lam / Sky histrionics a full 10.

You could tell we were rusty but there were a few decent performances: Clark, Hill, Austin. Even though our pack didnt really shine, I don't think Wigan would have scored in the middle of the field if we played until Sunday.

What it showed was how much me miss Widdop. We look clueless without him

Claiming Marshal was knocked unconscious, one of the many gems over on the Wigan forum.

No mention of Thewlis being kicked in the head and losing half a pint of blood and needing 13 stitches though from what I can see.

People need to watch the replay back he actually looked up to see where the ball had gone before he became *unconcious*

We are being a bit hypocritical here (Toby King etc). Marshall was kicked in the head, he failed his HIA. If the doctor had come on the pitch the game would have been stopped and the question of video ref/penalty would have been irrelevant. I guess it would have been a penalty as it was contact with the head, however accidental.

Can someone provide a link or evidence to back up the claim that any impact with the head is an automatic penalty.

Im "saddened" by the Wigan forum. Its almost as though its been infiltrated by Saints fans.

Not true.

The laws of the game state: A player is guilty of misconduct if he, when effecting or attempting to effect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally, recklessly or carelessly.

This idea of ‘accidental contact with the head being a penalty’ is a myth.

That is what I was thinking. Is there anyone out there who can prove otherwise?
If the ref. was to stop a game every time there is head contact I think this would be a real problem. Already we see players pretending that a slight touch of the head has suddenly left them in mortal danger. They then suddenly recover when they realise it might lead to them having to go off the field.

Blake ferguson has just left the field in the eels/roosters game with a massive gash on his head after a defender accidentally caught him with his knee. I hope lam was watching as no penalty was given and it was simply play on.

The law isn’t expansive as far as I know meaning accidental isn’t a excuse.
The rule is that a kick, trip or strike is misconduct.
It’s whether the ref interpretation is that Charnley kicked Marshall or it was just contact through motion.

No because it isn't. Completely accidental acts are play on (Well, apart from a kick off/drop out going out on the full or not going 10, but even that you could argue is reckless unless the kicker fell over or something).

Back to the game . As i see it ,last ditch defence rescued us again last night & if our defence had cottoned on sooner to Wigan's overloaded left side attack maybe they wouldn't have scored their 8 points.

With Akauola playing on our wing, I was surprised that Wigan didn`t focus on creating an overlap to get Bibby outside him.

It happened once, that I can recall.

They had early success on our right side edge, and seemed obsessed with that side instead of switching to our left, where Akauola would have been exposed.

I enjoyed last nights game (from my sofa). Yes we were rusty but it was a contest and end to end. Rock solid defence for the most part and a win. Some of the refs decisions baffled me. I would’ve gone to the screen to check Mamo’s try, I have no idea why Cooper was penalise (per Sky “standing too close”!) or why Mamo got binned and how he chose which Wigan player to follow him.
Wigan look far too young, and lightweight in the pack and their woes stem from that in my view. KPP looks a real prospect for them though.
D Clark clearly MoM, King still looks a bit off the pace to me.
Why Wigan didn’t pepper Akouala all night is a bit of a mystery!

Pleased to note that our victory has caused consternation on Redvee, us having added Hicks to our salary cap cheating.
To be fair they are a divided camp. Those that are just happy with the boring but winning rugby v those who want to be entertained.

Sita was great, Wire’s weak point is always the right side and it’s been exposed frustratingly for me too many time this season, and notably Wigan attacked the edge with preference and score 2 early tries there.
As much as there is a love in for Mamo currently, his defence with Charnley sucks, but I don’t blame either of them, I blame Price for not fixing it.

If you had watched Wire as a neutral and knew nothing about the players ... would you pick out Sita as a weakness? It worried me that he would be exposed but it just didn't happen.

Talking of Mamo is he likely going to be in trouble with the club for getting involved with the fans at the end of the game. I noticed on Wire website it asked fans to not go near the pitch or try to get selfie’s etc with the players but clearly Mamo was not bothered, I was not at the game so don’t if any other players done the same.

i think, sita did 17 hit ups last night

sticking to the game plan, though that game plan does seem based on our shaky patch down the right side around the cc semi final, that sorted itself at saints.

That being said, austin defended like he was playing for a contract last night.