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

I said it doesn’t matter if he gets it wrong 99% of the time.

You seemed to be the one suggesting the kick was lucky where it ended up.

I clearly state as you do the kick was executed perfectly.

I think Sneyd has arguably one of the most accurate boots in the game.

I don’t think it’s a 50/50. These are pro players not kids down the park. He puts that ball there on purpose. He backs himself to do so and did it. He picked out Farrell.

This was all considered before. Claiming he only gets it right 50% of the time I think is disrespectful to one of the best kicker in SL over the course of his career.

Now in your next hypothetical scenario

You say it’s a 5 out of 10 he executes that kick.

I disagree. I think it’s more an 8 out of 10. He clearly backed himself and got it right on the money.

Your next ones are very odd.

5/10 chaser has to beat Wigan player to the ball…both did.

5/10 jump higher than the Wigan player….both did.

These things happened he targeted a shorter player who doesn’t usually find themselves defending such kicks, he kicked it perfectly and both Salford got to the ball first and got off the ground first and got higher. All this was considered BEFORE.

The play failed because 2 Salford players got too excited or didn’t communicate and got in each others way.

It was calculated and I think in each case much more likely than a 50/50.

They were comfortable with our attack until Smith was binned because we didn’t have one!

We were doing 5 drives and a kick 1 out awful rugby.

Smith getting binned changed the game in a positive way for us as it meant French got his hands on the ball as he was anonymous for most of the match.

In that last 10 I am guessing he had more touches of the ball and more meters than the previous 70.

Pro players are looking for mismatches.

Sneyd created one but due to them getting in the way of each other failed to convert it.

French looked for a mismatch at the end to score his try I don’t think we score that or win the game if Smith is on the pitch.

We were far too formulaic in that game up to the Smith binning. French and Field then got involved much more and the style of play totally changed. We had momentum in the last 10 and actually looked dangerous, momentum was with us despite being 2 behind.

They needed to change the momentum and I’d say the scenario’s that you score as 5/10’s….were much more like 8/10’s which is backed up by the fact that they actually all happened.

Kick was perfect.

Salford players got to ball first….both of them.

Salford players got higher than Faz….both of them.

Unfortunately for Salford and luckily for us only one needed to get there first and get higher to what was a perfectly executed kick from a player who on the night made Englands best organising 7 look out of his depth in his control and kicking.

Edit - the kick wasn’t perfect. It was probably 3 yards too close to the touch line having watched it again. I’m thinking the plan was for MacDonald to catch it but that 3 yards pushed it more towards the Nuafouluma hence the mix up in who goes for it.

If kick was on the money Nene M would hand got it, where it landed he DN should have got it which I think he does if NMcd pulls out and doesn’t contest it.

Never known such an inquest into us winning a game

Wished he'd gone long now and we'd lost

We still win it if he does…just need a couple more plays to do so.

More plays because it would have e
Been harder



Remember it was me and you who finished 1st and 2nd in Wigan RL fans unofficial Most Boring Posters
I can't think why

Just like to analyse things more than others…..whilst boring everyone to tears.

I think that is unfair, it must be a Saints fan

Jonh, everyone is entitled to their opinion. However one thing is missing from your argument. You think we may have scored if they had kicked long. That's hypothesis. We did score when they kicked short. That's fact. By virtue of that single difference it was the wrong play. The facts say it was.

The point being made is Sneyd getting the blame for making the play.

It was in my opinion very good and clever play from Sneyd made in an attempt to close the game out.

The issue wasn’t Sneyds play it was the chasers.

I believe the the best chance of Salford closing that game at that moment in the game was for them to get the ball back in that situation and I think it’s a play that is successful 7/8 times out of 10.

From a Salford point of view all the difficult bits were executed correctly and the simplest element of the entire play was where it fell down.

I am glad we won this amount of scrutiny on 1 play in a game we won,just think if we had lost.

I understand the points you're trying to make but history shows it was the wrong play and Sneyd chose that play. It doesn't matter that it may have worked if x, y or z had been different. They weren't. The play failed ergo it was the wrong one.

I understand also that Sneyd executed the kick well but that was only one cog in a machine. Let me put it this way. If you got in a car where the wheels could fall off and the wheels do indeed fall off, are you at fault for driving the car or is not your fault because you actually drove the car well and, had the wheels not fallen off, everything would have been ok?

Stop it Phuzzy,just stop it now.Jonh will come back with another analogy and explanation and another question of lets say "if it was a hire car it could mean the hire company was at fault as it was a dodgy vehicle" etc,etc,etc

I appreciate the sentient and I see the point of view.

I’m convinced it was the right play.

Put it this way, and obviously we can only speculate because we will never know, but if they go long and we score, by the above logic going long becomes the wrong play.

And if my auntie had balls etc...

You can equally say if they'd gone long and we hadn't scored it was the right play. There's only one thing we know for sure and that's going short was the wrong play. Definitely. No need for what ifs.

Listening to the NRL 'experts the easiest place to defend ìs ur own 10 so I get why he did it. Well never know if we'd have scored if he'd gone long

It was the wrong play as they lost,if it was the right play they would have won (maybe).
Now surely that is that !