Pemps wrote:We should be putting a team, with 1 win (at that point) out of 15 games, away with relative ease with or without Hock and Lockers. We've got a squad of what I thought were decent players. The fact that those 2 are missing shouldn't matter against a team like Celtic.
We should be giving Wakefield a game with those 2 missing.
Their league position is a very valuable point in this. They are bottom of the league for 1 reason and 1 reason only. They're crap! They've got the worst points for and the worst points against. They've won 1 game and, up until yesterday, were 8 points adrift at the bottom. If we were 2/3/4 games into the season then we could say that league positions are irrelevant, but we're 16 games in and at this point a teams position in the league tells us all we need to know particularly when they're adrift at the foot of the table.
I wasn't there yesterday but I didn't need to be to make up my mind about how good we were. The sooner something happens with this team, whether that's players dropped or people ousted, the better for me.
{Hogan} wrote:Regardless of all your positive comments towards the Celtic side, they possibly played the best they can. But it was still a NL1 standard performance from them.
Wigan should have had NO problems beating them and beating them with ease.
says a lot for ur own team if they are nl1 standard why dont u just give celtic the credit they deserve u dont have a god given right to win every game
Joined: Jul 20 2008 Posts: 87 Location: Harworth near Doncaster
They weren't crap on Saturday were they? They just used very simple tactics and they basically kicked us to death! We seemed to start every set on our own 10-20 yard line. They didn't slow the play down any more than we do when playing the likes of Leeds etc and you can't even blame Ganson!
jinkin jimmy wrote:Don't you think he looks way out of condition? I certainly do, and think he needs to shift some serious weight. As a full time professional athlete I expect to see a different body shape to that on display at the moment. He may have made good yards against the worst team in the entire history of Superleague, but he is surely capable of performing better if his physical condition improves.
Also, it gives me cause to speculate about our training regime and to wonder just what our players are allowed to get away with. Allowing him to take the field with a 40" gut and a pair of shorts bigger than my table cloth ain't good enough for me, I'm afraid.
Feka's size and physical appearance is irrelevant providing he does what is expected from him. He size and weight is what creates impact, yards, attracts defenders and keeps him standing for enough time to produce an offload. If he loses size and weight he will not be as effective in this role.
IMO, Feka is doing his job with the tools best suited to him. There is no point in moulding him into a style of prop that he isn't built to be. I think the question is; Is Feka the style of player that we want within the squad?
Personally, I think we do.
Last edited by ABP' on Mon Jun 15, 2009 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ABP' wrote:Feka's size and physical appearance is irrlevent providing he does what is expected from him. He size and weight is what creates impact, yards, attracts defenders and keeps him standing for enough time to produce an offload. If he loses size and weight he will not be as effective in this role.
IMO, Feka is doing his job with the tools best suited to him. There is no point in moulding him into a style of prop that he isn't built to be. I think the question is; Is Feka the style of player that we want within the squad?
Personally, I think we do.
I'm glad I'm not the only who thinks he's fine as he is. He works hard on his fitness and responds to whatever criticism people decide to throw at him because he doesn't look like LMS. He's an impact prop who does a job for us. Just because he isn't Morley or Peacock doesn't give us the right to try and change him.
Mugwump wrote:Feka's size and shape sends a message to all current and prospective players about the level of professionalism demanded by the club.
So his performances mean nothing?
If his size and shape was such a negative issue than I'd doubt he'd be one of, if not the most popular player at the club.
Players coming through the ranks aren't naive nor thick enough not to understand Feka, his physique and the fact his presence within the first team largely (excuse the pun) down to his physical size.
Come on get real!! Feka's size and fitness has very little to do with what is going on at Wigan. He has been one of our best players and consistently makes an impact when he comes on.
The message it sends out is that you need to be the size, shape and level of fitness to make the greatest impact on the field.
If you were going to bag any of the props then it has to be Fielden - and that has been done to death.
It's strange how Saints fans have a go at the size of Feka, and conveniently forget how big Barry Ward was, and how much of a hero he was to many Saints fans.
Feka is 10 times the player Ward ever was.
SAINTS THE ORIGINAL AND PERENNIAL CHEATS
For sale full Saints kit (circa 1989). Shirts in pristine condition, but shorts badly soiled.
For 27 - 0 you get a trophy For 75 - 0 you get sod all.
Wigan had eight in a row Saints have five in a row
Joined: Sep 19 2003 Posts: 3525 Location: Manchester
ABP' wrote:So his performances mean nothing?
If his size and shape was such a negative issue than I'd doubt he'd be one of, if not the most popular player at the club.
Players coming through the ranks aren't naive nor thick enough not to understand Feka, his physique and the fact his presence within the first team largely (excuse the pun) down to his physical size.
Sorry but for once I agree with Mugwump (Despite the signature to his posts - "Celtic Nobodies" is an offensive way to describe a new team in SL and speaks volumes of the attitude of Saints fans these days...)
Feka is grossly overweight for a pro RL player. I've made the point previously that when Tuigamala - a big star in world rugby union at the time - was signed by Wigan he was forced to lose his excess weight. Sadly standards have slipped massively at Wigan. The backroom staff should follow Noble out of the door when he leaves. Which will hopefully be soon.
Badwanger wrote:IMO, Sculthorpe at his peak was better than Hanley was at his.
nickmanator wrote:billy boston in todays game might pinch a spot bringin the cone on and that bein kind
robbierotten wrote:Imo Sam Tomkins is a very poor mans Danny Brough he is just a average player getting bigged up by the idiots who comentate on sky.
Deano G wrote:Jonathan Davies, who is his equal in [Super League] today?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
(Despite the signature to his posts - "Celtic Nobodies" is an offensive way to describe a new team in SL and speaks volumes of the attitude of Saints fans these days...)
