A lot of truth in this mate. Wigan definitely made a conscious decision to defend the lead as could be seen by the substitutions. Taking Mago off at half time and him not returning, especially when he was clearly making inroads into the Wire line, was a statement of intent. Defending a lead is something we've done many times before including last year's Grand Final. This team is very comfortable doing that. It's also worth noting that, although defensively superb, we weren't at our best in attack and probably played the "game in front of us" so to speak.

However, I think Warrington are a better team than they showed on Saturday and will probably offer the biggest threat going forward. Much was made by your guys of being on a journey and I think that's true. Compare and contrast to this time last year. The progress is there for all to see.

The kicking game was crap and in truth has been all season. It's a weak point for our team.

I’m permanently incredulous about how professional rugby league halves (especially those allegedly brilliant at kicking) cannot find open space with a kick. Our long kicking is extremely poor and we don’t have a plan B of even a decent bomb - which again I find very hard to believe a pro rugby player can’t execute 9/10. Sneyd will give us a masterclass on Friday.

There are very few good kickers in the game in the UK. I genuinely think out best long distance kick option is Danny Walker. Drinkwater seems to stand really flat but still when kicking, and is quite easy to apply pressure to him. And Williams long kicking game is and always has been limited.

Our best hope, without being flippant, is to not rely on a long kick. Until Ashton dropped that bomb, we were doing ok for field position. He should catch that on his 20 and with only Miski actually chasing with intent, we could have started our set on the 30 line. Even with Wigan’s defence we would be kicking from opposition territory. It’s the errors that killed us, and the penalties.

I’m frustrated why we feel we’re too good for a kick to the corner though. I know late on we did it, but in the first half we had chances to kick to King but didn’t, I think we even got caught on the last rather than opting for it. I know it’s boring, but it’s limited risk. The worst that can happen is a 20m restart, but the kickers just need to drop it short of the line and that problem is solved.

It’s a combination of things for me that go wrong when we lose the monument. The panic was palpable. The pass from Williams on our own line on 38 minutes in tackle one tells that story. If we were in front by 50, he doesn’t play that pass. If we’re in front by 1, he doesn’t play it. So why when we’re down by 10 with 42 minutes to go would you? It’s a desperation to change the game, rather than trusting the process and getting back to the things we had been doing well.

Congratulations to Wigan. They deserved the win.
That game reminded me of when we played Catalan at home a couple of months ago. We looked a bit shocked at the start of the game by the opposition line speed and discipline in defence. What has worked against Hull FC, London, Huddersfield etc was not going to work.
In that game against Catalan we had to create a number of repeat sets to wear their defence down. Their three-quarters were a handful returning the ball that meant that Abdul could kick without any pressure and place the ball exactly where he wanted. Wigan did exactly the same. The kick pressure we have seen in most of the games this year was just not quite at the same level and the cycle of Marshall, miski returning the ball and by tackle 3 Wigan were in our half.

Wigan applied a lot of pressure out wide in the knowledge that we were going to try and go round them, we then became frightened to shift the ball in case we got bundled into touch. We just didn't have any answers
Hopefully Gleeson etc will have a better plan for next time.

I don’t think that the wayward passes were the biggest problem the real issue is the Wigan pack was dominant which resulted in Wire trying to play round them. Defensively Wigan produced their A game, offensively I would say there is plenty of improvement. Wire have definitely taken a big step forward and they need to build on the foundations that Burgess has put down by integrating their juniors and recruiting better.

Our pack is not consistently good enough against the bigger packs. We were completely and utterly dominated in the middle on Saturday, it wasn't even a contest. I fear we are not recruiting for props any more as the vox populi seems to be "we have plenty". But Burgess is well placed to assess.

Yep we need a new dominant big powerful front row,
Cos Saturdays front row are only bench quality against the top teams

I don’t think there’s need to fly into panic mode, the team had a stinker - it happens. Saints had an absolute mare in 2019 (very similar to our performance) they soon got over it. Friday is massive as it will tell us a lot about this side and any chances for the rest of the season.

Agreed no panic, just an observation of the pack. Let's hope we bounce back with a good win.

That was very disappointing and a year too soon. In our team there were:
4 CC Winners
2 WCC Winners
3 GF Winners
9 International players
1 State of Origin Winner
2 players with 10 NRL Seasons

Teams who go to Wembley normally have a dip two weeks later.

My assessment as a Wigan fan. I brought two mates with me, one a big both codes rugby fan who doesn't follow a team, and one who is a football fan who had never been to a rugby game before. They both very much enjoyed the day. It's interesting to me that while, as rugby league fans, we are seemingly all worrying about the optics of empty seats and what we need to do to fill the stadium and get a better atmosphere, their attitude was very positive. They thought the crowd was really impressive and the sense of occasion was very much part of the day for them. My football fan mate was very pleased that he could have a pint in his seat, and was pleasantly surprised that we had Warrington fans sat right in front of us, with no worries over segregation.

To the match itself, I think Burgess was probably right to focus on the fact that 12 of the 17 had not played in finals before. Wigan only had two where that was the case and I really thought it showed. I had a good chat with one of the Warrington fans at half-time and we both agreed that the big game experience was making a difference. The interesting there to me is that I think it was the players with finals experience that suffered. I wonder if they felt too much pressure to stand up and be the leaders today, rather than just playing their usual games. Williams, Powell and King all had unusually poor games. Warrington's last tackle options were poorer than usual, both in choice and execution. But the biggest factor, as several have mentioned, was in the forwards. Wigan got on top early there and never let go. Thompson and Cooper looked every inch the England veterans that they are and Vaughan and Harrison, both of whom I rate highly, looked as poor as I have seen them this season. Philbin was missed. He has looked much more like the player of 2019 this year, and his aggression may have helped out there.
French and Field had the Warrington defence rattled a lot of the time, hence why King shot out of the line when he shouldn't. They say you have to lose one to win one, and I wonder if this was your lose one. I still feel the Grand Final is going to be any two of Wigan, Warrington and Saints and it could easily go differently then. As for the officiating, I didn't have a problem with most of it, barring the obvious incredulity at the harsh yellow cards and the long deliberations over the French double movement. Ball carrying arm clearly hit the deck while the tackle was effected, and there was a clear second movement to lift the arm and ground the bball over the line. Not sure why it needed all that time, especially after being sent up as a no-try.
Thanks to the Warrington fan sat in front of me for welcoming my mate to his first rugby match and sportingly offering us a handshake at full-time. Rugby league fans are truly the best,

Great post.

Lose one to win one? We are owed a few GF successes then

On the double movement; if I'm not mistaken you are allowed to move your arm if you are still moving, a point that seems to be being overlooked. Promoting the ball only comes into play when your momentum is stopped. French said he thought it was a try because he was still moving and there's an argument to say he's right. Not that it mattered in the end, of course.

One of the clearest double movements you’ll ever see.

I thought the delay was working out how to restart the game - i.e) double movement or knock on. Maybe I was being generous.

Firstly a caveat: I'm not arguing it was a try or that it wasn't a double movement. For clarity, my first instinct was always double movement and I called it as such while watching the game. However...

We often hear that a tackle is complete when the ball carrying arm hits the ground but this isn't true. A tackle isn't complete until momentum stops. No one would claim that the tackle was complete at the point the ball carrying arm hits the floor if the player then slides over the line. In the French example, the player is still moving at the point his arm hits the floor and is still moving when he starts to move his arm. Both allowable under the rules. At the point he grounds it he has stopped moving so it depends if you regard the arm movement as during 'live play' or not.

From the BBC website (couldn't find the RFL rule explanation):

However, if the player is in the process of being tackled and the ball has not been grounded before the try line, then they can make a second movement for the score.

I'm not making a judgement either way but it probably isn't as clear cut as it would seem if you apply the incorrect "tackle complete when the ball carrying arm hits the ground".

The ball was initially grounded 5 yards from the line….my only surprise is Wiganer Liam Moore didn’t give that itself as a try a la Wardle in the WCC.

Caveat - I know we was not robbed. Moore also responsible for both shocking yellow cards.

Not if he was still moving, which he was



Obviously it doesn't matter either way but I thought it interesting that we all (myself included) seem to think the "tackle complete when the ball carrying arm hits the ground" is cut and dried when, of course, it isn't.

TBH i thought it was a try at the time as French was still (just about) moving as he reached out to put the ball down. Those can easily go both ways.

As I say, French himself thought it was a try which is how I came to look at it again. I initially just went with the general consensus of "tackle complete etc." Looking at the rules, though, he probably has an argument (not that he was particularly bothered either way in the end of course)

Here’s one for you. If Eckersley fails to ground the ball then Wigan get a penalty try (kick from in front of the post) and King is sin binned for a professional foul. Wigan in theory were penalised twice and did not commit an offence

The rules https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/do ... 0Rules.pdf Page 23 and 24 When tackled: 2. (A) player in possession is tackled: Grounded (a) when he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground. - this happened When an attacking player is tackled within easy reach of the goal line he should be penalised if he makes a second movement to place the ball over the line for a try. - so did this If an attacking player in possession is brought down near the goal line and the ball is not grounded it is permissible to place the ball over the line for a try. In this case the tackle has not been completed. - the tackle was completed under 2 (A) Correct decision.

The rules https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/do ... 0Rules.pdf Page 23 and 24 When tackled: 2. (A) player in possession is tackled: Grounded (a) when he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground. - this happened When an attacking player is tackled within easy reach of the goal line he should be penalised if he makes a second movement to place the ball over the line for a try. - so did this If an attacking player in possession is brought down near the goal line and the ball is not grounded it is permissible to place the ball over the line for a try. In this case the tackle has not been completed. - the tackle was completed under 2 (A) Correct decision.

Quote ="Wires71"The rules https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/do ... 0Rules.pdf Page 23 and 24 When tackled: 2. (A) player in possession is tackled: Grounded (a) when he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground. - this happened When an attacking player is tackled within easy reach of the goal line he should be penalised if he makes a second movement to place the ball over the line for a try. - so did this If an attacking player in possession is brought down near the goal line and the ball is not grounded it is permissible to place the ball over the line for a try. In this case the tackle has not been completed. - the tackle was completed under 2 (A) Correct decision.'" Well you say that but if momentum wasn't stopped he wasn't tackled as seen when a player slides over the line after being tackled short of the line. The decision (according to those rules) depends on whether you think he was still moving when his arm hits the ground (he was) and therefore the last paragraph comes into play. If he hasn't been stopped, he hasn't been tackled even if his arm hits the ground. This is a purely academic discussion btw as I'm happy with the decision.

Quote ="Wires71"The rules https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/do ... 0Rules.pdf Page 23 and 24 When tackled: 2. (A) player in possession is tackled: Grounded (a) when he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground. - this happened When an attacking player is tackled within easy reach of the goal line he should be penalised if he makes a second movement to place the ball over the line for a try. - so did this If an attacking player in possession is brought down near the goal line and the ball is not grounded it is permissible to place the ball over the line for a try. In this case the tackle has not been completed. - the tackle was completed under 2 (A) Correct decision.'" Well you say that but if momentum wasn't stopped he wasn't tackled as seen when a player slides over the line after being tackled short of the line. The decision (according to those rules) depends on whether you think he was still moving when his arm hits the ground (he was) and therefore the last paragraph comes into play. If he hasn't been stopped, he hasn't been tackled even if his arm hits the ground. This is a purely academic discussion btw as I'm happy with the decision.