I often think that, is it still the case where if a second player of team in possession gets involved the ref should call held? I hardly ever see it when close to touch or on any line calls.
I'm not so sure on kicks ... you could say it seems a weakness because it's the only way teams can break us down and score? It's a lottery on decent contested kicks. King and KPP was very good at helping on that right edge in that area, I don't think it's all down to Miski this season.
I'm hoping that's our flat performance, all the time we are getting closer to seeing Harvard and Walters bolster the pack and Leemings impact.
I really liked Mago, Dupree and Leeming off the bench both props can dent the line and Leeming off the back Looks hard to deal with. As the season goes on I can't see how Walters or Jnr don't start making the team, no slight on ISA but both would add quite a bit for me.

I think we'll see our style of play evolve a little as the pitches dry up and Walters and Junior play more.

We're playing far more up the middle at the moment and interplay between the forwards is a good addition to the attack. Watching Bell play last night I think we do need to do a little more of that to take advantage of the strength up the middle.

When Walters especially comes in I hope we'll see more running and offloading on the edges and Field. Bevan and Liam running off his shoulder.

At times I think we leave a a few points on the field as we can play a little conservatively . I'm not saying we should play like Leeds as they do the opposite, don't do the hard work in the middle thinking they can score on every play, but as it gets drier we should be making more use of the skill out wide and speed up the middle..

The great thing about this season is we have far more options in attacking options. Add Kruise in at 9 and we have another dimension too.

The only team that deserves to win is the team that does enough to win.

Salford didn't.

They played with lots of endeavour, and the determination to throw it around like it was a game of summer sevens (in pouring rain) was interesting but ultimately didn't do it for them.

I'm also bemused by those who think Sneyd's short drop was the right decision. It cost them the win; it's as simple as that.

See NSW
There's not only you thats wrong

I think you might be missing the tongue very firmly in the cheek there mate

See above post Jukesy

Nofaluma should have caught it!

Fair point.

People have made plenty of the fact that short drop-outs are much more common in the NRL, which they are. And teams get the ball back fairly often. Or they wouldn't persist doing it. But when you're ahead with a few minutes to go, perhaps not so much.

They changed the rules in the NRL to encourage short drop outs (and kick offs). It's a turnover if it doesn't go 10 or goes into touch on the full so it's not quite as risky.

Sneyd should still have gone long though.

That "removing the jeopardy" thing in the NRL is completely unnecessary. Clubs were already going for short drop-outs last season, and that worked fine. No need to encourage them further by making it even less risky for the defending side.

i've watched the full match back this morning on Warriors tv and the focussed quite a bit post match on this and Sneyd's reaction

The play was for Watkins (i think was the inside player) to catch / pat back and the winger (hang back) to then take the ball or worst case be in a defensive position to stop Wigan from scoring. As he jumped and challenged for the ball, he was out of position and thus a walk in for Wardle

how, all of Tomkins, Wilkins and Carney though the short kick off was the wrong choice at that point in the game, but equally were of the mind that Nofaluma played the play wrong, and not Sneyd

That's just a play with cockup written all over it, had Watkins patted it back and he winger was in position he could have knocked on, Watkins could have knocked on, the winger could have been taken into touch. The logical play is get the ball as far away from the tryline asd possible and hunt a mistake.

True, its probably a 1 in 100 success rate, but most likely you are chasing the game that you would try that play

you are 2 points in front with 5 left on the clock is not the time for it, i think most would agree. Launch the bugger as far as you can, it was wet, so possibility of a Wigan knock on, plus we'd have been 40-50m away from Salfords line

What i did like though, was Rowley's post match interview. He knew they'd blown the win, but was also very measured and didnt chuck Sneyd under the bus in front of the tv camera's. He's a class coach and has that Salford side playing some good rugby.

Personally think it was a good call and I don’t think it was Sneyd’s fault as the execution of the kick was outstanding.

I’m sure it was MacDonald and Nofauluma chasing, and they failed to communicate. 1 should have gone up for it the other hung back. Not only did they leave nobody home they also got in each others way that were it a 1 on 1 they should have been favourites for.

If they had gone long they are still defending the first tackle in their own half. With the level of strike we have a break usually results in a try from inside the opposition half and with the urgency and change of strike tactics once Smith was yellow carded (which I think was positive for us as it forced French link the game ball in hand) I believe we score if we get the ball back.

Lack of communication in my opinion cost Salford that try not the tactic.

agree, re the execution and i think it was my earlier post that i said something very similar, in that both winger and centre went for the ball, instead of winger hanging back for the pat back or worst case, he's set defensively. From a Wigan perspective it fell perfectly to Wardle with no-one to beat




however, you can still see the argument for both the short and long kick. Normally the short kick off is when you are chasing the game, as its higher risk and you need the ball back. Kick long, and yes, whilst you are still defending, you are 40-50m up the pitch and have a better chance of keeping Wigan out that 5 tackles within 10m

See NSW
There is someone else who's wrong (unless Jonh is being sarcastic as well)

With a narrow lead and the clock on your side you do NOT go for a short drop out, it's absolute madness to even contemplate it, let's face it, we were not firing on all cylinders in the game so why would you as a Salford player suddenly think that everything is going to click in the last few minutes, you go long and back yourself in defence.

Correct

And to jonh
You say you think Wigan would have scored if they'd got the ball back from a long drop out???

They'd already defended 2 x sets against 12 men and numerous others since the 45th minute, why not the next one starting from 40 out?

What was going to happen if they did get ball back, they'd already been shoved over the line from a 10m ptb 30 seconds earlier, who's to say that wouldn't have happened again?
And, if they did get to say the 30mtr or so they were only going to kick it back to Wigan anyway? And by your logic they wouldn't have defended that set as at least 3 or 4 of those ptb's would bebin their own half?????
Bearing in mind there was enough time for another Wigan set after that as well !!!!!

Imagine if instead of that being a drop out it was a kick off and Wigan were 2 behind. Would you want Sneyd kick short then or boot it as far as possible and keep Wigan in their 10?
Using your logic you'd go short and try and get ball back???
Madness!

I'm not decrying short kick offs, but there's a time and a place and 4mins left, 2 points up, drop out from under your owner sticks was not the time nor the place.

Will agree to disagree.

9 times out of 10 I expect outside backs to get over the top of Farrell in a high ball situation when he is static and they are running towards the ball.

In fact both got over him on this occasion they just messed it up by getting in each others way.

Salford were creaking big time.

They needed the ball.

All the momentum was with us.

We played terrible rugby with Smith on the field. Our tactics were far too conservative. We were making much more threatening plays with him off.

I believe we score if he goes long.

I think they get the ball back if only 1 player goes up for it instead of 2 and we get ball back with 90 seconds less on her clock and in our own 30.

There wasn't 90seconds left, there was 4mins (or thereabouts)
Sneyd gets the execution spot on
At least 50% of the time he doesn't, you can't ignore that factor
You can't ignore that 2 players could mess things up, which on this occasion both did
You factor in that farrell or another player (if the kick goes 5mtrs ) in any other direction "could" get to the ball before, jump higher etc

When you factor all of those in they get the ball back 1 in 5 in my opinion
And that increased Wigans chance of scoring 10x fold easily, as if we don't score we get 5 plays and a much chance of a repeat set with 3 more mins on the clock

I just dont understand how you can say if Salford kick long Wigan will score (your previous reply) yet in a situation where there is no evidence to suggest its better than 50/50 ( i would say when you factor in all the variables it may be a 1 in 5 shot of getting it back), even if they do get the ball back they're still going to have to defend 2 x sets and kick well (my argument being them further away from our line isn't usable in your argument as you say we'd score if we kicked further anyway).
Yet, of theyndont get the ball back they're going to have to defend in their own 20

If they were kicking off from centre field would you want them go long or short????

In regards 90 seconds left…that’s when we get the ball back deep in our 30m zone if the play comes off.

Sneyd did get the execution right. It was a perfect kick on this occasion, so it doesn’t matter if he gets it wrong 99% of the time he got it right on this occasion.

I factor in Farrell because that who was picked out. If for example Nsemba and Walters were on the pitch I don’t think he goes for the play. Farrell was targeted.

If you are stationary under a high ball it’s a more difficult task generally to catch than it is for players running towards the ball especially if you are not used to it.

The 2 players who contested the ball are both regularly tasked with taking high balls, Farrell is not. Both players get to the ball first whilst Faz never gets off the ground, it’s an easy take for an outside back at this level if they don’t get in each others way.

If one goes up for it I think he gets it, if one goes up for it and pays it back to the other they get it. 2 went for it not communicating and that is what killed them not the kick in my opinion.

In my opinion if they don’t get the ball back on that play we score.

If they go long we start our set on the half way line with the momentum and score.

If they get the ball back they run down the clock by 90 seconds-2 minutes, if they put the ball in touch maybe 2:30 by the time the ball is out of the scrum. If they get the ball back they probably get to the half way line, meaning when we get the ball we are going to be deep inside our 30 on the back foot with 1 set to score.

If it was from the centre of the field as in a standard kick off go long, but it wasn’t.

They gave themselves a chance of getting the ball back and really should have. Poor communication from the 2 outside backs caused them to not only not regather the ball but by committing 2 players into the contest left nobody at home.

Momentum is massive in games. We had it at that moment in fact we got it as soon as Smith got binned because we had to move away from the grind and get Field and French on the ball.

If we regather in their half with it I believe we score with the strike we have on the field. The presence of Field, French and Wardle in particular forced their hand.

Right play, right execution from Sneyd, poor play poor execution from the centre and winger.

As you say earlier, agree to disagree
I just don't understand the logic behind the thinking

You say it doesn't matter if he gets it wrong 99% of the time, it absolutely does matter!
Because he doesn't know BEFORE he kicks it that he's going to execute it perfectly
If he doesn't (your words 99% of the time I would say 50/50 at best) then it's the wrong decision
But you have to factor all of those things in BEFORE he kicks, not say it was the right decision AFTER he's executed it perfectly
And then factor in that all of the other stuff such as both chasers have to be perfect and that Wigan don't get to the ball instead.

The % play is to go long, and replay that situation 100 times and we score more times going short than we do if they go long.

You mentioned he gets it wrong a lot. I don’t believe that is the case.

He was easily best half on the field on the day and his kicking game throughout his career has been outstanding.

He pretty much won Hull the cup because of it.

He’s an excellent kicker of the ball, he was on the day too so he was right to back himself.

I agree if he gets it wrong 99% of the play don’t go for it, but I think you do him a massive disservice as a player if you don’t think he has an excellent boot.

Both chasers don’t have to be perfect, they have to do their job which is very basic…communicate.

They knew the play was coming and didn’t.

I’ve actually not watched it since the night and I just have now, if you watch it from the rear angle from the camera behind the sticks the winger had a clean run at the catch with Faz welded to the floor had MacDonald not gone for it too it was a comfortable take for a player of his ability.

Sneyd, targeted Faz, backed himself to execute the play. Executed it perfectly and I’m holding the winger (very experienced player) for not calling or the centre for not listening which in that situation lost them the game, not Sneyd.

They needed the ball, they knew it.

They didn’t get it.

It was your words earlier that mentioned getting it wrong 99% of the time (Sneyd did get the execution right. It was a perfect kick on this occasion, so it doesn’t matter if he gets it wrong 99% of the time he got it right on this occasion.)

I said he may get it right 50% of the time
A no point did insay he wasn't a good kicker or any of the other stuff you put about my opinions on Sneyds ability because I didn't make any opinions

My point was you were basing the outcomes on something AFTER the perfect execution without acknowledging that whether it is the right decision or not has to be made BEFORE the kick
I was right there as he walked towards the drop out, I saw him make a hand gesture to the centre/winger to say he was going short BEFORE he kicked it
I called ot to the 4/5 people I was with and they all looked stunned before he did it, and after he did it (after the celebration).
Because for it to be the right play it's got to be executed kick perfectly (let's say he can do it 5/10)
Chaser has to beat Wigan player to the ball and jump higher to wither catch (5/10) or palm back (5/10) and then support player pick it up without any other playwr in the vicinity getting to it (5/10) and when you factor all those things in they'll get it back without knocking on etc maybe 1 in 3, and then still defend another set from wherever if they Don't knock on or whatever

They go long and he 99% doesn't go in touch or whatever and they defend a set from their own 40 approx, something they'd already done 15 times that half already and rarely looked in trouble

BEFORE he kicks it I know which one I want him to attempt
BEFORE he kicks it I know which one 99% of Salford fans want him to attempt