Why dont we study videos from the early 90s and recreate some of the moves?

All this structured swinging the ball from left to right and no variation or set plays is making the game too robotic and boring.

Watch Australias first try in the 95 World Cup Final. Not one team seems capable of that kind of play these days.

Absolutely - clubs need to incorporate more variation in their attack. Games are often monotonous, formulaic and repetitive. Go back to the mid 90s yes but you don't even have to go back that far - if you look at some of the games in the early 2000's and check out some of the attacking play there you despair at what games are like now.

I’ve long thought about that to be honest. But equally I think the way teams play these days is that style but evolved and arguably more refined.

There’s a lot to consider really, even though the suggestion is relatively simple. Defensive structures have moved on from those of the 90’s and 00’s, player shape, game speed.

Perhaps I’m over complicating it but it really is an interesting debating topic; will going back in time for moves/plays send us ahead of our time now?

I think its more about seeking inspiration for ideas rather than copying moves like for like.

Castleford brought a simple run around into their play a couple of years ago and it ripped a few teams apart just because it was something different.

I agree, to a point. Games are very much the same now week in and week out, little differs between teams other than the name on the shirt.

Thing is there is just so much more to it than how we move the ball around. Early 90s, players weren't as fit, there weren't the number of subs, there wasnt the sports science there is now. Teams/players are so much fitter and well drilled now, the gaps just aren't there that where there in the early 90s.

It’s amazing how a simple move can open a defence like that just because it’s something they’ve not planned for. We had joy in 2010 with Joel Tomkins running a diagonal line off the dummy half and flicking the ball to Sam running the opposite line but we don’t seem to have invention in our play like that anymore.

Fair point.

In that respect plays were much simpler back then but equally we haven’t moved too much away from it. The game still incorporates simple drop offs, run around, jockey plays. The only thing that is changing is the props passing the ball IMO. Like I said I think it’s more the game has evolved in attack to stay in front of evolving defensive structures rather than we’ve moved away from the style of 90’s and 00’s deliberately.

Hit the nail on the head. Add the way teams control the ruck in defence now which means that you simply aren't facing a scattered/retreating defence anywhere near as often as teams were previously. I see teams from years ago willing to go 5 - 10 metres back with the ball to create space to put a move on. Do that against today's defences and you simply lose those metres and get a slow ptb too.

We had quite a few successful set plays under Madge but Waney got rid of them.

I think we will see more of the runaround move now that French is at 6 because of his electric pace and wicked sidestep

One thing you don’t see anymore and id like to see it tried to see if it worked was the kicker dropping deep on the 5th with the kick chase being deliberately offside and having to give the kick returner 10m, it would work it you were in your own half and needed to get out of there. It used to be common place and there are negatives to it, like leaving the kicker all alone and if they spill the ball it’s a walk in try or the defence has to get back quick and will be knackered. Still, I’d like to see if it would work.

I’ve always thought this. A simple runaround kills some D. I think that Hastings will be a wonder if given half the space a freedom he had at Salford. I understand 4quick drives, fall on your stomach, bounce up and roll on - producesspace, disorganised D, then either a play to the outer side or penalty give. All that in our own 40. Anything beyond 40 we should think quick roll on and then put attacking plays on. I think the wane era ( which I’m not knocking) is still partially with us.

Our Attack was better under Wane than Lam.

Want to see some set plays introduced this year

I think last season showed how much we missed Sam Tomkins. He did so much work off the ball in terms of organisation and talking to players that without him this season just gone, we looked lost. Also he was the man to come up with the match winning plays to get us the win like in some close games in 2018 (the drop goal v leeds from near the touch line springs to mind)

Don’t buy into the ‘our attack was better under wane’ as the only difference is that wane had a genuine match winner to get us out of trouble in games we never looked like winning.

The attack was much the same for me but Wane didn’t ever make statements that his team would play rugby that would blow your socks off. At his original press conference Lam promised attacking and entertaining rugby, to the point where even Edwards joked he would buy a season ticket but aside from a fleeting glimpse of it around April time, we never really saw it. He was actually very conservative in his selections, leaving out attacking players like Escare and Greenwood on a regular basis.

No excuses next season. In terms of personnel, he has some unbelievable attacking talent at his disposal. If you can’t get a back line including French, Hardaker, Manfredi, Gildart and Hastings playing entertaining rugby on the back of a bigger pack and threats on the edge through Farrell and Greenwood, then you’ll struggle to do it with any side.

Our attack last season was as poor as I’ve seen for many years at Wigan, probably since 2006ish when we were in a dire mess.

This season it was highlighted further after Lam’s claim he’d improve our attack.

Lam has so much to improve in 2020. So far I’m not convinced in the slightest.

I agree but there has been glimpses that for me show some promise. He simply has to deliver in 2020. The squad is there to compete and to challenge for trophies, and not wishing to paraphrase our current tool of a Prime Minister; no ifs, no buts and no excuses.

This season will be the acid test for Lam. It was always going to be a difficult year last year, Wane leaving was a massive shift in culture, that alone would make things difficult, then all the other factors were added in, injuries, off field incidents etc.

Like some I saw glimpses of what the team was trying to do we just didn’t do it on a consistent basis.

This year has seen a significant change in playing personnel which should suit Lam’s style a bit more. I suspect we will see a slow start as players bed in and will hopefully pick up as the season goes on.

I would agree with that and it sounds strange to be critical with us finishing 2nd and getting within 80mins of a Grand Final but that to me papered over some blindingly obvious cracks in our defence and attack. Irrespective of off field issues and some injuries I think we should have been better.

I also suspect a slow start, as most teams have anyway. That being said I don’t expect a start like last year which was at times diabolical. I expect improvement week on week and around the June time is where Lam should be judged on the season(s) he’s been here.

I think Lam inherited a very good team which was more than capable of winning and being competitive.
Edwards not coming etc was the best thing for Lam; it gave him a great excuse to use for when the team massively underperformed.

Look at it this way; if you’re a player who’s playing well and loving life under Lam you’d be ecstatic hearing Lam was staying on. No one on that team has any connection or relationship with Edwards; no one was effected by Edwards not arriving.
But that wasn’t the case. The fact is that we were playing poorly at times terrible in a very poor league which was even more highlighted with the void between Saints and the rest.

Correct. Thinking back whilst contributing to the team of the decade thread reminded me that a lot of the players I picked hit their peak around Maguires arrival in 2010. It can't have been a coincidence that so many of them hit career-best form when no one had been signed. Who can we say hit career-best form under Lam? Maybe Powell and some of the youngsters who you would naturally expect to improve with gametime. All established players apart from Powell were either the same or regressed, even Williams who Lam set his stall out right from the offset to improve.

If today's players are far more fitter and athletic then why do they need more substitutions than the less fitter players of yesteryear

Simple really;

They’re fitter and athletic to cope with the physical demands of the more intense, speedy and athletic game than in the 90’s. That increase in intensity and fitness demands means an increase in substitutions must follow.

I disagree, still 6 tackles, drives tackles etc, 10 metres, I think they manage their time wrong and go 100 percent at everything when its not needed like the wrestle in the tackle. In the 80 and 90's they hot them low and they hit them right so wasnt time to offload as much.

They don't need it. The fact is they're fitter, bigger, stronger, plus there's more subs. There's always fresh bodies with much better conditioning. Combine that with the fact the game is all full time, with all kinds of defence coaches, this is why there are far less gaps now. The game isn't what it was in the 90s, simply adopting a few runaround and drop offs and players running from deep isn't going revolutionise anything.