"Debating the attack" doesn't qualify you as a doom monger. I didn't comment personally but was interested to read about that point of view. You would no doubt be in heaven if like you everyone just posted how brilliant we are, even when presented with clear evidence that our league position is no indicator of who will prevail this season. Some would say that makes you a happy clapper but that's just another figure of speech I suppose.

I think people not being satisfied with that win on Sunday is a sign of the massively high standards we've now got and that is a real positive IMO. I'm somebody who wasn't overly impressed with Sunday, I thought we were left with a few more questions of our credentials then answers, but I know we can and will play better.

I really don't get why anybody shouldn't be able to give constructive criticism. If somebody posts utter drivel about things that simply weren't there, like a lack of effort or application then fair enough bag them but when it's constructive things about tactical issues and the like then that is surely what this forum is for, to debate area's we need to improve.

I was sat on the second tier behind the posts Sam was kicking towards and I am pretty sure it drifted wide.

It has been interesting watching this article develop, it started out with the first poster just saying that we seemed to struggle when Leeds played with a rush defence. HE WAS SHOT DOWN IN FLAMES WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS.

Most Points scored.
Least Points conceded.
Massive points difference compared to the opposition.

Those statistics do not mean a thing when it comes to a very close match, against Wire, Leeds and Hudds (to a lesser extent)we have been found out a few times in the last couple of years.

It is just common sense when things are not going well to have options, I was the first to post on this article and I mentioned having Sam at halfback on the odd times. Give your opponents who think they have your number something to think about.

One prime example comes to mind and I admit play 30 plus years ago was not as structured as it is today.

It was watching the great Bill Ashurst in the second row, Bill was one of the cleverest Forwards I ever saw play and without doubt the hardest .
Bill had a trick of receiving the ball even when in his own half, dropping it at his feet giving it a short punt then charging after it. All this was under the old 5 yard rule and defenders did not have much time to obstruct, if they did it was either a blatant obstruction or Bill used to take retribution.

What was brilliant about this was if Bill got through, the fullback or covering halfbacks had the choice of rushing forward to dive at Bills feet, or hang back, which was often to Wigan's advantage. Nobody dived at Bills feet if he was going for the ball.

I may have been a bit melodramatic with this post, but what I am trying to get across is always have options when thing are not going to plan.

Fair point.



Which is in a nutshell what this thread is about. My point is all the better sides have done this and we have not dealt with it very well.



That follows from what you said above. We didn't deal with it very well so when it wasn't working where was the variation?



They did need to stick but as someone else mentioned another way to deal with it was do as we did the other week and switch Sam to 6. Not all the time but that would have caused pause for thought IMO. We just don't seem to have a plan B.

It's a no-brainer to say we will be in the mix for the trophies. Unless there is an upset we will be in a semi-final for the CC. It's the semi's and finals where we will need a plan B if plan A isn't working IMO. That is when we will have to beat one of the better teams when it matters.

How do you feel are attacking structures did against Leeds on sunday?
Take into consideration
Our movement
Split halves
How we use Sam in attack
Our attacks, anything more than the obvious one if you know what that is
Leeds rush def on the flanks.

I have answered in full explaining my thoughts, since you have mentioned our structured attack in a reply post I'd honestly like to know your thoughts in case I missed something when watching the game back.

PS I also commented on the arm wrestle and pack, stating how I thought Leeds won the arm wrestle pe-silly mistakes.

Wigan play to a set structure, the players in the structure is almost irrelevant as Wigan don't play anything off the cuff. The advantage is when a player is injured someone can slot in and know the structures.
The disadvantages is a predictable attack.

There's only one player that makes a difference in our attack, Sam. Our play is geared around opening up channels for him from FB.
Just have a look at our win/loss record with and with Sam, says it all.

No, our fans spot the bigger picture, how Leeds countered our set play. If Leeds wouldn't have give away some silly pens/silly options it would have been a different story. Sinfield gifted Charnley a try.

Good post.

I feel people are focusing on how we've been hammering lesser teams and getting carried away, our attack structure does clearly work against weak teams, but that doesn't mean it'll work against the top teams.
With our structure without Sam we are 90% down on options, the whole attack is geared around opening up channels for him, just look at our win/loss record with/without Sam.

Once again a good team (only a small number of them in SL) found us out and stunted our attack. IMO there's only Wigan, Leeds, Wire and Hudds who are any good in SL.
V Hudds LOST
v Leeds LOST/WON (just)
v Wire Drew (Beaten everytime we've played them since the cup run) .

Wigan can turn over poor/average teams all day long, doesn't mean they'll be taking home the GF/SL or CC.

No ones answered to the fact that we had at least four opportunities to score that were scuffed without help from the leeds rush defence (an argument could be made for oloughlins offload to joel moon being a result of the rush defence) All of which on another day would have stuck leading to likely scores.

Been quite an interesting debate, some spectacularly missing the point but no surprise who they are. Sunday was the first time this season we've beaten a top 4 side and as I said in the original post it was good to grind out a win for a change because they are the ones that will help us when the games really matter and not 50 or 60 point thrashings.

I think we actually missed Green quite a lot on Sunday as he has been the one who seems to have the rugby brain to adapt to the rush defence out wide and has varied the play a few times by throwing dummies, putting little kicks in behind allowing Faz to score and putting doubt in the defence for future plays.

We've lost Thomas Leuluai, George Carmont, Jeff Lima, Gareth Hock and Brett Finch just from last seasons side. That is a serious amount of top quality we've lost and in the main replaced with young talent.
All this negativity about Wigan is crazy, we've absorbed the losses and look a genuinely top class team and that is an absolute credit to Wane, the rest of the staff and the players who have stepped up.

I ,for one, am really proud of how they're doing and i think we've got a great chance this year to win the Grand Final.

We definitely missed Green's smart play, although Powell had a very good game. Our attack is predictable at times, the key is to keep reinventing it throughout the season. Correct me if I'm wrong but the move to set up tomkins try was new to me, Vickery rushed up to cut out tomkins which left a gap for thornley. We need to keep using Sam as a decoy, a great tactic IMO. Wane is doing a great job with our attack.

It was more of a goal than Pat's first two!

Amazing how people can be negative of the team so far. Having lost the quality players last year and starting with a new half back partnership, and suffering the injuries to Hansen, Prescott, Lauaki, Mossop, I'm very happy to be top four, let alone top. Yes, Leeds made us work hard, but let's not forget they are the Grand Final winners, and have great pedigree in winning the competition.

Most of the constructive comments on this thread have not been negative, all some posters are trying to point out is that is another arrow in your bow to be able to change things if plan A is not working.

I'm fine with how we are playing at the moment. We will win nothing by trying to peak in May. So what if there are areas for improvement, maybe SW has learned some lessons from last year and is preparing the side to hit top form when it really matters. I think we have a great chance of silverware this season.

Good post, and I totally agree. Some people miss the point of a forum and discussion, unless you shout from the rooftops that Wigan are the greatest thing in the world today you're being negative, this in term gives people an excuse to start an argument rather than a discussion.

So, if you are negative, its a discussion, but if someone disagrees with you, its an argument?

People are not being negative in this thread.

Theres a difference in disagreeing with someone compared to having a pop at them by accusing them (or people in general) of being negative. A valid point of disagreement would be how significant Green's absence was. But for example prefacing any opinions on that by accusing people who don't think it would have made a great deal of difference with accusations of negativity isn't a discussion because it has nothing to do with the topic.

Here are my thoughts having re watched the game a couple of times:
- I am not concerned about our ability to score points in the backs as long as Sam is fit. Without him, I can't see us winning the big games;
- we have already shown we have a plan B if the opposition rush up. Blake and Smith broke down Saints by taking the line on or giving short passes when they tried the same thing the week after our wide plays had destroyed Widnes;
- we could have scored at least one other try, from Powell's run and Josh's wonderful break. With our defence 24 points will pretty much always win us the big games;
- this was wonderful preparation for us. We closed out the game in very professional style, compared with the panic which has set in at times over the last 2 years;
- my concerns are with the pack. I think we need bigger props against Leeds and Wire. I would have played Taylor. I also think that Hansen's lack of threat with ball in hand limits one side of the field, as he doesn't ask any questions of anyone. Burke or Hughes will very soon be a better bet;
- people are concerned about us winning things, but with 2 of Wire, the Giants and Leeds out of the semis we could reasonably only have to perform once to win the second most prestigious trophy (which of course makes the down playing of the league where you have to play everyone without any luck of the draw even more absurd). We can certainly do that;
- so, for mine it's not so much a Plan B as getting more out of our pack, which in turn will allow the backs to work their magic.

Is being able to grind out a result, like we did last Sunday, a plan B ?

If someone posts "I hate some of our fans" I would call that argumentative and therefore worthy of a verbal slap down.

Whatever people may think about plans A, B, or even C, i believe that the most crucial point has been made by Apollosghost. If you read many of the books written by top sportsmen and women, mental attitude is a very important factor in sport at the highest level. You can discuss tactics all day long, and they are indeed important, but being in the right frame of mind is absolutely vital. For all of Leeds success, and their achievements over the last few seasons have been tremendous, we are starting to see chinks in their armour. Their pivots are not as effective, Maguire has lost a yard of pace, Sinfield is not as reliable, Burrow is nowhere near as dangerous as once was. Peacock is still a threat, but its more of a mental threat than a physical one than once was, i don't think our young props are as in awe of him as they have been. I don't see them as the threat they once were, and in sport you have to believe that, or you have lost before you step on the pitch.

We have a very well structured attack, and a miserly defense. We have a squad which has flexible parts, and which can function without some, i repeat, SOME, component parts. This team don't have the outstanding players that Leeds have, or that the Wigan teams of the past had, its a product of the modern game, but thats another discussion. What it has is a lot of young players that have bought into the systems we have, and, to my eyes the team spirit is outstanding. Some people like to have a pop at Wane, don't insult people's intelligence by saying you don't, but he is a head coach in his second in his second season, like his charges he is learning, and to my mind has done terrifically well considering the amount of quality players he has lost.

As we move towards the later, and pointy end of the season its going to be very interesting to see how it all pans out. To my mind we have the best squad for the task ahead. Our young halves have more experience, our forwards have been outstanding, and our systems have blown many teams away. You can point to individual games, and i will conceded that this can be used as a counter argument, i would just point to the table, and our last game! Injuries will play a part now for all teams and of course we cannot see into the future. The injury to TL last year was crucial to my mind in deciding where the silverware went. Provided Sam, Smith, Micky Mac and Green stay fit at the pointy end of the season, i believe we have the team to take a clean sweep of the silverware. If they don't, we will still be pretty damn close..

As would i... Some of our fan's annoy me too..