Walters could provide that sort of impact.

He’s due a big game, he has been quiet the last few weeks.

To be honest I want Drinkwater playing my worry was that Ratchford would be promoted and he is a far better player and goal kicker. Although I would add that Drinkwater is a better tactical kicker. Hopefully, Jnr and Sam will give him nightmares on Saturday.

I agree with most of that all that I would add is that there is a whole world of difference between hitting a player high when he is stood upright compared to when he is falling.

Regarding the final, we all know that the rules are going to be applied far more sparingly.

Where is there any mention of cheating?

At centre? Hes got the turning circle of the QEII at the moment. Far more likely be Eckersley or maybe even Farrell

Think he meant replacing Dupree

One thing I'd be really angry about is if we let ourselves down again disciplinary wise on Saturday. If we look at both of the competitions we haven't won under Peet, our defeats both came off the back of red cards (one to Shorrocks and one to Bateman). There have also been some others in key games - Ellis x 2, Singleton, Byrne etc.

We all remember what happened in 2014 when the title was there for the taking and we self destruct. If we lose on Saturday let it be because Warrington are the better rugby team, not because we couldn't control our aggression.

I did mate, sorry for any confusion.

This all day for me. I don't want to see tinkering with the team that pulls multiple players out of position ie Farrell to left centre so Wardle goes to right centre, then if we get an injury to Walters or Nsemba we have to rejig the team again. Eckersley is next man up, the lad has loads of ability, get him in and get on with it.

I understand what they are trying to do but it is not always possible to get it right all the time in split second decision making.

For example, say two players who are both 6ft, defender bends his knees, arches his back and turns into an attacker and therefore say drops his tackle height by 2 foot, if the attacker remains straight the defender will make shoulder contact around the waist, if the attacker suddenly falls to his knees as he is brought down from behind also, he drops his height rapidly by 2 foot and therefore the defenders shoulder is around the head of the attacker.

The defender dramatically lowered his tackle height yet makes contact to the head, how can the defender alter his tackle anymore other than aiming for the knees of the attacker or even readjust in a split second to make contact below the head, it is almost impossible.

Now I am not saying AK had adjusted his height to that degree but he obviously adjusted his height as you can see where his shoulder was, he hit the head of a player almost on his knees so his shoulder had dropped, I am saying that we should have enough technology and video evidence available to 'measure' these adjustments and timing of height changes etc. to see if the player could have made any reasonable adjustments before making contact.

As for the term 'forceful contact' im sorry but if you are going to make a tackle on someone running at you full speed who is potentially 14 stone of pure muscle, if you are not going in hard to counter the attacking player then you are a danger to yourself.

'Forceful impact' is a really misleading criteria without taking it into context. A swinging arm with forceful impact is very different from a forceful impact of a planned tackle where the point of contact has suddenly changed from the intended point -as is the case in a player quickly losing height.

The defender is always planning to use a forceful impact in the tackle, that can't change in time he has, if any to make adjustments.

I agree with the above poster it should possible to use technology to assess how much reaction time is available for the defender to make an attempt to change the point and/or force of contact.

I agree, and this is why I can't stand the MRP as a concept. Like I said, players aren't doing this on purpose so handing out retrospective bans is both pointless and just effects the integrity of the league far too much. Just punish them on the day for getting it wrong and get on with it. If the referee misses it on the day then it's unfortunate but that's sport.

That said they do seem to be handing out far, far less bans over the last couple of months than at any point over the last 3 odd years which is an improvement, but again these 3 match bans are just stupid.

To me, the MRP should only be there for serious acts of foul play that are missed by the ref on the day, or are spotted by the ref but are so serious they require further action. You'd think you could use common sense to see which incidents this refers to. As for the rest, make use of the yellow card. It's a pretty big punishment without completely ruining games like red cards and suspensions and make like football and give out a suspension when you accumulate too many. Obviously you'd still need to give a red for bad ones, but they're used far too liberally now. Go on twitter during/after any single game this year and you've got people saying so and so should have been sent off. Every game. How we got here as a sport I don't know, but it's not good

We aren't helping as fans. It's become a feeding frenzy after every single game of fans baying for other team's players to be banned. It's absolutely ridiculous! In answer to your question of how we got here it's because the disciplinary is having too much influence on the season. Here we are in cup final week once again talking about bans and no bans. Same prior to the WCC and no doubt it'll be the same prior to the Grand Final.

MRP missed Drinkwaters high shot and O'Neill gets fined £250 for a push and Musgrave same offence nothing.

The refs and MRP are encouraging cheating by the way they run matters.
Keighran got belted under the chin by two Wire players. The ref saw it and gave Wigan a penalty. That was it!
If Keighran had milked it and stayed down holding his head with the medics surrounding him then the VR would have reviewed it and probably one Wire player would have gone to the bin.
With Keighran getting to his feet immediately and by not reviewing the incident they are inviting players to stay down to get medical attention and a review with a dismissal for an opposition player of some sort almost inevitable.
This really needs to be looked at by the refs admin people.

Correct

Have to agree what goes around comes around I suppose

So you can headbutt whoever you want so long as you don't mind paying the fine. Great idea

Glad to see you posting again, something good has come out of that post after all


PS

Yawnnnn

=#FF0000Absolutely no need for that comment - Moderators

Those who can, do; those who can't, ref.

Keep telling yourself that you and your mates are doing a great job tho. It's definitely helping.

Personally, I am glad that Wigan has put their disciplinary issues to bed, it is vital that we concentrate on the job in hand rather than being distracted.

Seen a few people wanting hill over cooper on Saturday. Is it me or is that a big risk. I rate the lad but surely the experience is needed and cooper is still more than capable of doing a job and would more so want to over his last club

I could see Keighrans ban putting paid to any chance of Hill playing. You’re having to bring in a kid with only 4 first team appearances to cover him and you also have Nsemba who is a very young/inexperienced player, so I think we’ll see Byrne or Cooper (or both) ahead of Hill.