: Wed Feb 11, 2009 12:24 pm  

was he watching the game or the cheerleaders.

there were more razzle dazzle from them.

razzle dazzle my ar$e

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 12:28 pm  

wigan pie man wrote:

was he watching the game or the cheerleaders.

there were more razzle dazzle from them.

razzle dazzle my ar$e

LOL made me laugh that for some reason

[DaveO]

Re: A criticism of Brian Noble. : Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:02 pm  

saints35 bulls0 wrote:

Saints lost 5 of the first 10 games last year, and were 8 points behind Leeds in the league with 12 games left.

Perhaps that contributed to why Saints didn't win it in the end, having to make sure of results in the last 12 games?

Dave

[DaveO]

Re: A criticism of Brian Noble. : Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:06 pm  

tyr wrote:

The media make a big deal of how Brian Noble always gets his teams ready for the play-offs and that's all well and good as far as I'm concerned. I am, however, beginning get fed up of finishing the season strongly, but having too much to do because we started so poorly. Each year, Leeds, Saints, or both get off to a flyer while we spend half a season getting ourselves sorted out.
In 2007, everyone was saying how, if we started like we'd finished 06, we'd be real threats but, instead, we seemed to have lost form over the off season, losing 3 of the first 4 rounds without even playing Leeds or Saints.
Last year, we actually kept pace reasonably well for a while, as we managed to grind out some victories while playing poorly. Even so, we lost 6 of our first 13 rounds, winning only narrowly when we won, but sometimes getting pulverized in defeat (a la Millenium Magic).
Logically, one would want to be playing well at the business end of the season but, realistically, you've got to finish top 2 to win it. Is Brian Noble so fixated on the end of the season that he doesn't pay due attention to the beginning? Is our pre-season substantially poorer than our rivals'? I'm just getting fed up of having to give up on a top 2 finish before the season is even halfway through each year. Hopefully that won't be the case this year but Sunday was not a good sign.

So am I ( the bit in bold). Good post and I agree you need a good start but really all that means is you need to consistently win games with just the odd loss here and there to get into the top 2. We have not been consistent for the last two seasons.

What you say about going into 2007 after the way we finshed 2006 was exactly what I thought. Very disappointing. We didn't play well at the start of 2008 though did pick up some points and first game out in 2009 we were terrible. It isn't good enough is it!

Dave

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:10 pm  

What is the most consecutive games that Wigan have won under Noble?

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:14 pm  

Charlie Seeling wrote:

What is the most consecutive games that Wigan have won under Noble?

Five in 2006 and five in 2007 ending against Leeds in the playoffs.

[DaveO]

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:16 pm  

Charlie Seeling wrote:

What is the most consecutive games that Wigan have won under Noble?

Wasn't something like 10 in 2006 in the run in but in 2008 wasn't it two or three? There is progress for you!

Dave

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:19 pm  

DaveO wrote:

Wasn't something like 10 in 2006 in the run in but in 2008 wasn't it two or three? There is progress for you!

Dave

No, there was five in 2006 as well as in 2007.

In 2008, out best streak was 3.

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:24 pm  

On the basis of a 3 streak we cannot win anything

Dave O is right then re progress or lack of it.

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:18 pm  

Charlie Seeling wrote:

On the basis of a 3 streak we cannot win anything

Dave O is right then re progress or lack of it.

If you take winning streaks as progress then yes. Personally i prefer to judge progress by looking at the bigger picture in which we got closer to the grand final last year than we did the year before. At least last year we put up a fight against Leeds and only just lost wheras the year before we where way off them and got battered.

In that case DaveO is wrong and always will be wrong.