Everyone (except Lam) can see the lack of creativity in the halves . That's what makes the continued use of Hastings at full back beyond belief . Convinced that Lam knows refusing to play Hanley there in in the first place was a mistake but he is so full of himself he refuses to admit he was wrong by playing him.

Regards , EW

Where are the minority who a short time ago shouted down anyone who dared to suggest that the club was in a bad way and making poor average signing!

The bloke is so stubborn it’s ridiculous

Won’t play Hanley at fullback to release Hastings back into the halves
Won’t recall Hankinson
Won’t give Hastings the kicking job
Froze out Escare
Froze out Jack Wells because Wells wanted more games on loan at Swinton to regain match fitness following injuries . He’s now Salford’s best forward ( whilst we struggle in the forwards)

Do you not mean -Sub-standard play from Wigan and correct decisions to sin bin 2 players from a team that knew they were well beaten so resorted to Thugby??

Always felt we’d end up regretting the Wells decision. He was outstanding as a junior forward and injuries plagued him but he got himself fit in his last 12-18 months here but unless your under 21 and not fully developed or your Tony Clubb, you ain’t getting in this front row.

That was a ludicrous decision for sure.

That said, Wigan spent most of the game desperately trying to stop a game of rugby breaking out so I'm not surprised they saw the wrong side of the ref.

Suprised Lam couldn't see that in the first quarter, it seemed that Lam had Harry Smith running the plays but our Kevin N came out of the defensive line to close him down. The opposition will be happy seeing Hastings at full back he is then out of harms way.

Wigan were always going to be limited with the ball missing the likes of French, Hardaker, Field and inexplicably playing JH at full back.

It's still all about the props for me though. There shouldn't be the difference there was in the pack, particularly with Lees and Bentley missing for Saints. I read somehwere that Walmsley made 164m from 19 carries whereas Bullock, Singleton, Partington and Havard made combined 175m off 31 carries.

Until Wigan sign some props they will be a shadow of the team they could be.

I see lots of similarities between Wigan now and Saints under Cunningham. Not so much in the style of play although Wigan are very basic in attack(as are Saints, I know) but I mean more in terms of the detachment between the coach and the fans. I feel like wigan fans are walking away from games feeling dejected and then Lam goes and does his interview and makes it ten times worse.

It’s as though Lam has his head in the sand and is almost oblivious to any problems.

That’s exactly how I felt under Cunningham.

It is identical IMO and we’ve said it on here for a while. A club legend as a player who looks totally out of his depth as a coach and looks stumped as to why it’s going wrong and devoid of ideas on how to turn it. I’d say like Cunningham, Lam has suffered a bit from poor recruitment but isn’t it funny that when you have a good coach, poor recruitment seems a thing of the past. So is it poor recruitment or the fact the coach is poor and isn’t getting the required standard from the players? Holbrook dragged unbelievable improvements out of the vast majority of your squad and I think a good coach could do that here. We need a couple of players but I can only dream what a coach like Holbrook could do with some of the attacking talent we have here (when they’re all fit).

Wigan have top quality backs playing behind a weak, shallow pack. That’s it. I cannot blame Lam if Lenegan and Rads aren’t doing anything about it.
You’re all venting red mist and anger and it’s so obvious to see Lam is pist off too. He’s not getting back up from the board. Lam saying, ‘we’re not far off’ is down to the fact he is waiting for players to return and had an inclination when he expects it.
Give Lam a break and start giving the Wigan board some grief for not supporting Lammy.

To even call it a pack is being massively generous.

Ethan Havard made 14 metres from 6 carries.

With all due respect mate, we all know we're playing badly at the moment but do you honestly think was an acceptable refereeing display? He gave 2 penalties for knocking the ball out of the hooker's hands (4 points taken) saying you can't do that. You most certainly can as long as you don't stray offside as the ball is played. The ball is live once it is heeled. Explain to me how a ref not knowing the rules is acceptable.

It's a specific rule on the goal line. You can do that in general play but not on the goal line. The rule got changed a few years ago after a spate of defenders knocking the ball down in that situation and benefiting from it. The clubs voted for that change. It's inconsistent with other areas of the field but it makes sense given the nature of how easy it is for defenders to knock the hooker's arm down when defending the goal line. Too easy to spoil the play.

The laws of the game on the RFL website makes no mention of this ‘new rule’ . But there again the ‘Ball Stealing’ rule hasn’t been updated either . Absolute shambles of an organisation

The thing is, how do Wigan fix it? Both the NRL (realistic targets) and SL off contract list doesnt exactly highlight an abundance of forwards that could fix Wigans problems.

The game as whole in this country seems to be lacking good props. Go back a decade or so and it was full of them

Yeah they should publicise the rules better to be fair. There was a press release at the time but it was years ago so of course that's difficult to find now. I do wonder whether people actually want to learn though. The referee explains it on TV and the general reaction rather than "I learned something." is "The experienced professional referee clearly doesn't know the rules as well as I do, and should be sacked."

I don't actually think we need anyone that special. Nathan Massey & Chris Hill were both available and would have improved us imo.

As a club we're not going to match Saints front row, so need to stop thinking about it. We simply need to improve on what we have and that would then allow us to get more out of the stronger parts of our squad i.e Hastings, back row etc.

If we signed a new prop and coach, we'd be a different side. I'm sure of it.

No, I mean exactly what I said. You’re miles off being a top quality side. It’s probably the least able Saints side for many a year and probably your lowest quality trophy winning side in Super League. No need to be so defensive, it’s the state of the game as a whole that’s the problem. Your team in the early 2000s, along with ours and then Leeds and Bradford would demolish the current teams without breaking much of a sweat.

It may not be our most talented but it's right up there in terms of attitude/discipline and is outstanding defensively.

I presume you mean with the benefits of advanced tactics and training techniques, because if you just dropped an early 00s SL team in against a modern SL team, they would be slaughtered. Today's SL isn't as exciting to watch, but the teams are far more effective in terms of doing what is required to win the game. When I watch the early 00s games, the defenders don't tend to control the tackle, and let go straight away as the tackle is called, so the PTB was really quick, regularly giving the attacking team a retreating/broken line to run at. Today's players are generally stronger, faster and fitter too. It is a genuine concern that we have got to a stage where the most effective way to win RL games is pretty boring for the most part.

Rads spoke about the differences in that recent out of your league podcast and it sounded like they were tempted to try and go totally the other way and reinvent the game but it would take a brave man and plenty of squad investment to do so. The game is currently being won by teams akin to Jose Mourinho’s old Porto, Chelsea teams or an Italian team who would defend their ways to titles but football changed with guys like Guardiola and Klopp and attacking football started to win out again. It’ll happen in Rugby League here at some point IMO but I doubt we’ll be the trailblazers. I can see that being Wire next season under Powell. If he could get that Cas team of 2017 playing as they did, I shudder to think what he can do with a spine containing the likes of Ratchford, Widdop, Williams and Clark.

The professionalism and dedication to training in the early 2000s is comparable when you look at the players who were around in many of the top sides. It’s not like there’s too big a disparity like there would be from 2000 to the 1980s. Yes coaching and tactical analysis has moved on but I shudder to think what Sculthorpe and Farrell could’ve done in this era to the teams we have now.

England 6 New Zealand 49

1. Kris Radlinski
2. Chev Walker
3. Scott Naylor
4. Keith Senior
5. Paul Wellens

6. Paul Deacon
7. Sean Long

8. Stuart Fielden
9. Tony Smith
10. Harvey Howard
11. Paul Sculthorpe
12. Mike Forshaw
13. Andy Farrell

14. Jamie Peacock
15. Andy Hay
16. Darren Fleary
17. Paul Anderson

There are some standout players in there but some very average ones too. I think the main difference between early 2000s and now is actually the quality of imports, which is a function of the money now in the NRL, and a slower play the ball which makes talented players look less talented than when we were playing with a massively faster play the ball. This in turn leads to more structure which again makes players seem less talented.

I actually think the overall standard of English players and youth development is higher now but I'm happy to admit there is a strong argument in the other direction.

but the coach at the time always played people out of position, I mean for gods sake Wellens is on the wing....says it all really