: Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:41 pm  

windy wrote:

Bring back Bill Ashurst, he would have had a field day with this rule

Can't someone have a word with Bill, we could interchange him regularly so he doesn't get knackered ?

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:46 pm  

IMO Richards would be better advised trying to stop 40/20s than create them. The way he loped about the pitch, especially for the first 40/20, on Friday was pathetic and the kind of display that would have seen numerous negative posts if Mathers had been equally useless at preventing them. Still, to some on here certain players shall always remain bullet proof.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:47 pm  

{Hogan} wrote:

He has a cracking boot on him, shows when he is kicking for touch. I would have thought Richards coming inside for a 4th tackle 40/20 attempt would be a great idea.

tell our esteemed coach that! richards has one of the 'biggest' boots in RL but for some reason doesnt use it except for dropouts and goalkicking. fair enough he may not be considered a 'playmaker' when it comes to kicks in general play but it should be a piece of cake for him.

get it sorted noble

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:13 pm  

One thing that Rugby Union can do well is positional kicking by the backs; the wingers and full back have to be capable of receiving a ball and kick the ball back a significant distance while ensuring the ball bounces before it goes into touch (same principal as a 40/20).

While no-one wants to see the kick-tennis Union can provide, I fail to see why our kicking coaches don't work on the positional kick (40/20) with a view to using it once or twice in a game, not in a season.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:13 pm  

jinkin jimmy wrote:

IMO Richards would be better advised trying to stop 40/20s than create them. The way he loped about the pitch, especially for the first 40/20, on Friday was pathetic and the kind of display that would have seen numerous negative posts if Mathers had been equally useless at preventing them. Still, to some on here certain players shall always remain bullet proof.

So your alternative is? They were very good play and it is just as much the wingers faults as well! And you cant exactly go around saying we should replace them when Ainscough is still learning and Amos is a work in progress to fill in.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:17 pm  

Boris wrote:

That Wigan kicked none at all is most suprising given we had Trent last season.

He kicked one with his first kick for Cronulla the other day

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:20 pm  

kirkamania6 wrote:

He kicked one with his first kick for Cronulla the other day

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:23 pm  

Coventry Warrior! wrote:

I dont get why we dont see teams kick from a 20 metre tap, or has this rule been scrapped now?

Can still be done but the refs never allow a quick restart from the 20 metre line so its a nullified option half the time.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:23 pm  

WigansForeignLegion wrote:

One thing that Rugby Union can do well is positional kicking by the backs; the wingers and full back have to be capable of receiving a ball and kick the ball back a significant distance while ensuring the ball bounces before it goes into touch (same principal as a 40/20).

While no-one wants to see the kick-tennis Union can provide, I fail to see why our kicking coaches don't work on the positional kick (40/20) with a view to using it once or twice in a game, not in a season.

The balls are much lighter and a different shape in union, making them lighter and easier to catch/carry.

League balls are heavier and require more effort to kick them.

: Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:25 pm  

Bovrick wrote:

So your alternative is? They were very good play and it is just as much the wingers faults as well! And you cant exactly go around saying we should replace them when Ainscough is still learning and Amos is a work in progress to fill in.

Do you have a problem with basic English? I haven't talked about replacing anyone. My point is a general one in that IMO Richards at times displayed a lack of urgency that would have been commented on if it had been displayed by certain other players.

But if you want to talk about replacements and Roberts in the same sentence I'm all for it. How the hell can a free scoring NRL winger on top money be a work in progress? The work in progress is the other winger who plays him off the field every week.

We have lots of back options IMO via Phelps, Goulding and Pryce. Roberts could be replaced easily and IMO should be. He is doing nothing so what could we lose? No threat going forward and makes no tackles in defence.