Re: attack : Fri Apr 29, 2016 6:06 am  

...whereas you have Sandow (when fit), Russell, Ratchford, Gidley... yeah, I know...

Re: attack : Fri Apr 29, 2016 8:25 am  

I'll judge us when we have Tomkins, Williams and O'loughlin back and firing. Smith is a massive scapegoat at the minute but his game is simply organising and getting the ball out to the 'flair players' (Williams and Tomkins). He's been playing with a backrower from the academy as his half-back partner for the last 4 weeks.

I also think Powells distribution from dummy-half is often slow and puts us on the back foot which gives us less space to move the ball out wide.

Re: attack : Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:09 am  

Nogga wrote:

I'll judge us when we have Tomkins, Williams and O'loughlin back and firing. Smith is a massive scapegoat at the minute but his game is simply organising and getting the ball out to the 'flair players' (Williams and Tomkins). He's been playing with a backrower from the academy as his half-back partner for the last 4 weeks.

I also think Powells distribution from dummy-half is often slow and puts us on the back foot which gives us less space to move the ball out wide.

Smith is the scapegoat because he has been found out to be incapable of doing the things you say what is game is "Simply organising and getting the ball out to Flair players" Those things he doesn't do, is organisation is terrible with so many young lads living the dream he should be able to boss and move round them round the field but he don't. Yeh agree not helped that he been playing with a academy backrower at half back last 4 weeks but whose fault is that.......Shane Wane! we have a five-eight playing hooker in Powell and numerous number 9's in the academy waiting for the chance. Remember Shane Wane said that we don't need to sign players and we will only consider signing players who are better than we have in the system. Obviously they are not because they are not playing and how many times does a young lad sit on the bench and not be used.

With regards to Powell "slow" distribution this is because he is not a hooker! Why did Shane Wane decide to play Williams off the bench as a hooker replacement? He came back from a bad back apparently so put him behind the play the ball bending over majority of the game......mind boggles.

With regards to our attack the issue is that Shane Wane is a forwards coach (which is why we sign numerous forwards) so we are playing structured / boring attack which in big games can at times not come off (look at the tries scored last night by Warrington compared to us ), which at the moment due to injuries doesn't look like coming off in any games.

The skill level in the team is very low, we have two centres in Gelling and Sarge who cant pass, Gelling may set up tries but he passes the ball like a basketball player in tight places when it comes to a simple pass it goes wrong. Who is Wigan attack coach...........? because the one set move we have as not changed since Madge brought it in 2010.

Re: attack : Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:15 am  

moto748 wrote:

...whereas you have Sandow (when fit), Russell, Ratchford, Gidley... yeah, I know...

Yes we have options, you don't which is why Smith needs to be smarter, getting caught on the 5th is dumb play, you then have to hope someone else is smart enough to put a tactical kick in...instead you'll probably end up with a backrower hoofing it.

Re: attack : Fri Apr 29, 2016 10:10 am  

The biggest issue is that we're using middles, pivots and edges rather than playing people in their natural positions and that's why our attack is so poor.

We had a U'19s second rower at 6, a halfback at 9, a prop at 13 and a centre who can't pass at 1. Add these together and you have no ball players other than Matty Smith who I feel is being let down on the pitch to be honest, no runners or blockers when it comes to te last tackle.

We should have played Bateman at 13, Sarginson at centre, Tierney at 1, Gildart on wing, Gregson in second row, Williams at 6 and used Burke in the reserves as a 9 to get him up to scratch or use Ganson as he's a good passer of the ball from the floor.

I think Greg Burkes days are numbered as I don't think he's big enough for a prop not agile enough for a back rower, he could potentially be a good 9 if given the chance and time to mould into one as Terry Newton did at Leeds.

All in all they need to play people in the traditional positions and allow them to play their natural game rather than have a set plan where anybody can slot into the main positions because when 'the move' doesn't work there is no plan B.

Gregson looks like he'll have a good career with us but I think he gets caught out in his positioning in defence, he needs to drop back down to academy level to develop further.

Re: attack : Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:24 pm  

post wrote:

We should have played Bateman at 13, Sarginson at centre, Tierney at 1, Gildart on wing, Gregson in second row, Williams at 6 and used Burke in the reserves as a 9 to get him up to scratch or use Ganson as he's a good passer of the ball from the floor.

This I like. Only doubt would be, would Tierney cope with the aerial bombardment?