I'm not looking at any further statistic because I don't have time to - as much as I'd like to compile a full model on the matter, life gets in the way. It's not any statistic, I've given my reason why I used the statistic I did and you yourself said it was a fair point.

You can ask "but whose perception is it" all you like - but it's clearly a common held belief amongst fans outside of your club. I think Wigan play closer to the line than other clubs, the stats I provided backed that up. I've not accused Wigan of being dirty or anything else, but I can understand how people interpret the citings as such (that doesn't mean they're right).

If wigan as a club don't want to be accused of "thugby" they need to step in line with the number of citings (the number of times they get close to stepping over the line) with other clubs - whatever that takes.

Reason your not looking any further is as i said it does not support your agenda and you fully well know that.

Otherwise you would have posted banned players and not citings.

Sorry, but that is complete nonsense.

You cannot use the most spurious of all the available statistics to prove a point that is unprovable.

Which club do you follow? Have you done any meaningful research on your own club versus others before jumping onto your high horse and coming to meaningless conclusions?

But, Jack's statistics refute your belief and Jack's hold more water.

Exactly.

Well i am bored to death today. Come from work so i had a look on the RFL site and put in dates for 1 year from the date of this season Grand Final. Adn the reuslts in which team had the most players called up before the Comittee.

MAESTRO















PLEASE

St Helens got 7 players
Wigan got 7

Thats why he did not do the search as he knew the answer and he calls us dirty.

Well both are just as bad as each other.

Could it not be possible

(now this might be beyond the comprehension of some folks)

That maybe.....

Just maybe.....

EVERY team in the WHOLE of Rugby League, could have a couple of players that like to partake in the biff?

If this was the case, could it not also be possible, that EVERY SINGLE BL00DY team in SL could be perceived to have played beyond the laws of the game at one point or another?

Is that such a far fetched possibility?

Ahem



So conclusion, teams cross the line as often as each other, but Wigan are closer to it more regularly which is why other clubs fans accuse you of thugby ... Sounds suspiciously like the conclusion I put in my first post on here...

More like you used a set of figures to prove a point and deliberately did not use the others as be honest you knew the players banned of both clubs. As that's an easier count than citings.

But again that figure never suited you so you used citings to point something out. I look at all the figures and not the ones suited to what i am trying to prove and then come up with an argument to justify those set of figures.

Except I didn't look - but if that makes you feel better fine

I don't care what people's perception of wigan is particularly. One way or another - I chose a set of statistics for the purpose originally asked for - and no more

Sorry, but that doesn't add up either.

What if, as I understand is the case, the citing committee is not made up of the same members each week? One member of the panel, on any particular week, may take a more robust view on, for instance, dangerous throws, whereas the week after, all the members of the panel make not give a crap about that. For it to be consistent, and therefore statistically relevant, the element of perception must be taken out of the equation, and as you have proven with your own perceptions, it cannot be.

To say that Wigan play closer to the edge of the laws than anyone else, because a panel made up of different people each week says so, is just daft.

Except his stats are wrong, which everyone seems to be ignoring

I have come to this discussion late. If some stats are wrong, could you please post the correct stats You must have them, in order to refute the other posters claim...

You have to laugh at all these bandwagoners. So confident that Wigan are the dirtiest team in SL that they spit their dummy whenever their own teams' infractions are mentioned.

They're all available on this thread already but who knows who's right. I'm guessing it's not Jack though.......




Charged just 6 times in 2 years?



Ah, 7 times in 1 year. That sounds more like it.


Now what about those citations. 66 in 2 years wasn't it?





So that must mean Wigan only had 16 players cited in 2013? WOW. That must be a record for SL. Well done Wigan.




Clearly.

No one else has done a player already out on the deck.

Saints had two players betting against their own team a few years back, no other SL team has beaten that record either.

I realise that the above is completely irrelevant, but then again so was your comment.

Here's what I've picked up from a few threads over the last couple of days:

If the stats don't show that Wigan are dirty, the stats are wrong.
If Wigan players havent been penalised any more than other players, it's because they get away with things.
If opposition players don't get injured any more against Wigan than other teams, it's not from lack of trying on Wigan's part.

In short, even if all the evidence point to the contrary people are still going to claim we are a dirty team.

Looks like Wigan need to bring in Mr Bailey and Mr Ablett, to give lessons in good manners and behaviour.... Naughty naughty Wigan... Looks to me like perceptions have gotten Wigan cited, but that a cold look in the light of day, found us not quite as bad as presumed...

Well in this case they clearly are.

Not to let a few facts get in the way of anything but....

doing a quick few sums from the SL stats page (regular season only I think - it's a bit sp on dates). Using a little from the old fairplay method (pen = 1pt, RC = 4pts, YC = 3pts)

P RC YC FP
Cats 200 0 4 212
Giants 193 0 3 202
Wigan 187 0 5 202
Salford 195 1 1 202
Hull FC 179 1 4 195
KR 179 1 3 192
Wakey 181 0 3 190
Widnes 174 0 3 183
London 165 1 2 175
Cas 155 0 5 170
Stains 161 1 1 168
Wire 155 0 2 161
Bulls 151 0 1 154
Leeds 141 2 1 152


In 2013:
Rovers 251
Dragons 241
Giants 232
Warriors 227
Tigers 226
Broncos 218
Vikings 218
Wildcats 214
Rhinos 211
Saints 207
Wolves 206
Bulls 201
Reds 194
Hull FC 191

2012:
Vikings 276
Hull FC 243
Bulls 241
Saints 234
Reds 227
Broncos 227
Giants 224
Dragons 223
Wolves 215
Rhinos 215
Warriors 214
Rovers 211
Tigers 201
Wildcats 197

Yes, clearly, and you haven't brought any facts to the table, you have just done the usual lazy perception thing, and poured scorn on other peoples to suit your agenda.

I don't mind if you find my stats to be incorrect, but at least do me the honour of actually trying to refute them with some of your own.

Please forgive me if I find it hard to take you seriously when you are too lazy to back up your own perceptions.

Theres a difference between biff and what flower did.

Go on then, show us how they are wrong.

Don't just post what you like to think is correct, show us how they are wrong by presenting your own.

It's seems like you find it very easy to ridicule other people's stats, but bloody impossible to come up with any of your own.

You've lost me there mate.