2013 Challenge Cup Final preview - Wigan Warriors v Hull FC

I'll try to be impartial in this. I have my tickets and obviously I want Wigan to win, but I also hope this will be a great game with a big crowd and big TV audience.

Although lots of people think the RFL wanted a Wigan v Warrington final, I don't expect any less of an enthralling occasion with this match-up between the teams involved in what is argued to be the best ever final in 1985 in front of apparently over 99,000 people at old Wembley! The two Wigan - Warrigton games this year have been great but I think this Wigan v Hull final can be every bit as good as any game we've seen in the northern hemisphere this season.

On that day in 1985 it was only goal kicking that split the teams on the scoreboard, coincidentally just as it was when the two teams met earlier in 2013 at the KC stadium, Wigan coming home with a 28-20 win as the teams shared 8 tries equally but Pat Richards nailing six from six kicks, to Joe Westerman's two goals.

Head to head
Wigan have won 8 in a row against Hull since 2009. That has included a 46-0, a 56-12 and a 48-10. Overall in the Super League years the record is:

That all looks a bit one-sided, but I wouldn't expect a one-sided game at Wembley. We should look at the most recent history to get a better indicator.

Here are the stats from the first meeting between the sides this season, which Wigan won 28-20 at the KC Stadium:


Many of the key categories are close - metres, tackle success, clean breaks are Phil Clarke's Key Performance Indicators. Wigan edged metres and Hull edges the other two KPIs, but the difference in all is marginal - I'm sure if it were on Sky Phil would have had this as a draw.

Stats 
What about the numbers this season? Do they give any clues on what we might see on 24 August?


One thing that should make the game very competitive is the defences on display. Hull are the most prolific tacklers in the Super League this year so should be used to defending when they come up against a Wigan team that tend to have more possession than most, whilst Wigan have the tightest defence for conceding points. We also have the two teams with the fewest missed tackles in the league, so we should get the sort of intensity in collision that we see week in week out Down Under.

Hull's clear problem has been in attack. They've made just above average metres, but only hapless London and Salford have scored fewer points, only those two and Bradford fewer tries, and they haven't been too hot in kicking goals either - though that might change with Danny Tickle fit again if he takes back the goal-kicking duties.

Wigan haven't struggled in attack over the whole - top scorers, most tries, most breaks, second in carries, third in metres. Wigan don't make many offloads, but they play a game that creates space through quick play of the balls and numbers of runners in motion on each play so that they find space and gaps to run through. However, in big games (semi-final aside!) against the top sides away from the DW Stadium Wigan have found scoring harder to come by - 10 points at Huddersfield, 14 points at Leeds, 12 points at Warrington, 16 points at Saints (only reaching 20 points v Leeds at Magic Weekend). If Hull can play like a top side, they can restrict some of Wigan's attacking shape and might be able to stifle the force of the Wigan way like others have. A note of caution though, Sam Tomkins missed three of those away games at top sides.

Hull kick the ball plenty and will look to turn Wigan around and get into their tackling often. Wigan on the other hand make such good metres that you'll see a lot of attacking kicks putting Hull under pressure in their own 20m area. Forty-twenties are something to keep an eye on, both teams have two players with more than one each this season, but on a big Wembley pitch we might not see any unfortunately - what a momentum swinger it would be if one of the outstanding kickers on show delivers.

Key men
Sam Tomkins - Sam is the man at Wigan. I know a lot of people think Sean O'Loughlin is as important or more important to the way the team goes, and I see where they're coming from, but the numbers suggest one thing - Sam in the Man. In Wigan's 2013 Super League campaign he makes the most metres per game and has put on the most tries for his team mates in the Wigan squad. He is second to Josh Charnley in tries scored and clean breaks, but averages slightly more per game than Charnley. Wigan have a win percent of 92.5% in the 20 games (all competitions) Tomkins has played in, but only 33% in the 6 games he has missed and Sam has had a direct hand in scoring or assisting 32% of Wigan's 133 Super League tries. He is the player with the most individual potential to win this match in an attacking system that is designed around the game-breaking ability of his incredible talent.

Sean O'Loughlin - Whilst Sam Tomkins brings the finishing touches to many Wigan plays, you can bet inspirational captain O'Loughlin has had a hand in the scoring set somewhere. Leading by example rather than command, 'Lockers' has proved himself integral to Wigan's play in both attack and defence. Although the numbers aren't as stand out as for Tomkins, Wigan have 86.1 win % when O'Loughlin plays and 62.5 win % when he doesn't play in 2013 (Wigan are 78.8% for the whole season). The stats don't quite bear it out, but anyone who was watching Wigan play without their club captain in home games recently against Castleford and Bradford who then compares the attacking fluidity with the cup quarter- and semi-final when he did play will realise the important role he plays in linking and guiding the attack around the pitch. One key role he fulfils is he sticks his hand up to do hard carries on early tackles in his own half, as well as then being able to play as a pivot when his team reach the opposition half. Defensively too, O'Loughlin is massive for Wigan. In Super League he has a tackle success of nearly 95%, made all the more impressive by his work rate in defence meaning he is second only to Liam Farrell in average tackles and marker tackles per game. The all-around importance of Wigan's leader can't be overstated and he will be key if he is to climb those Wembley steps to lift the trophy as he did in 2011.

Daniel Holdsworth - Sean O'Loughlin was Wigan's man of the match in their semi-final, Daniel Holdsworth got the nod in his team's defeat of in form cup holders Warrington. That in itself should undermine his big game importance. Hull have 60 win % when he plays compared to the team's 59% win-ratio in the league this season, so that suggests he makes only makes a slight difference, but he was in place to help his team to wins against Warrington, rivals Hull KR and Leeds in a brilliant May run for the team. Young Jacob Miller has a lot of potential and Aaron Heremaia never lets his side down, but Holdsworth has the experience, vision and kicking game to lead his team around the park.

Danny Houghton - Houghton is just a machine in attack and defence. Capable of going the full 80 and not letting his standards drop, he can have even greater impact when spelled with Heremaia. He leads Super League in tackles, marker tackles and runs from dummy half and, impressively for someone so involved, he makes few errors and rarely concedes a penalty. He sets the pace for Hull in both attack and defence. His form is such that he might edge his way into the England World Cup reckoning, he really has been playing that well. He doesn’t miss many games so it's impossible to tell what impact it would have on the team if he weren't there, but you have to think it would be noticeable given the standards this player sets. Wigan can't allow him to set off on the back of quick play of the balls as both Catalan and Warrington saw what damage this can do to retreating defence in the past two rounds of the competition.

Obviously these are the only very good players on each team. Shannon McDonnell is having a strong season for Hull and Michael McIlorum will be dangerous out of dummy half in opposition to their counterparts discussed above. Wigan have great experience in the likes of Pat Richards and Harrison Hansen, matched by players like Andy Lynch and Gareth Ellis in FC's squad. Josh Charnley and Darrell Goulding up against Tom Briscoe and Kirk Yeaman should be a great all English match-up. Danny Tickle for Hull and Lee Mossop for Wigan, both confirmed departures from their clubs at the season's end, will want to leave on a high with a cup winners medal too.

Others to watch 
Anthony Gelling - Beyond the headline names, there are a few player I think could make an impact that you might not be expecting to. For me,  Gelling is one such player if he is picked to play left centre. Since getting a run at centre his numbers have improved across the board, particularly in attack. Other than try scoring, he has been a revelation in what many see as his best position, making 121m per game and seeming to win almost every collision he carries the ball into. Sure he is impulsive and a risk taker, who doesn't always concentrate, but he is a different player to what Wigan have elsewhere because of this. In a tight game a bit of variation or a brilliant offload that isn't in the normal structured pattern of Wigan's play could break things right open - Gelling brings that threat.

Scott Taylor - A Hull lad and former Robin, you have to think he'll be up for this if picked. Scott has been building an increasing reputation amongst the Wigan fans and a level of excitement is beginning to grow every time he touches the ball, with goo reason too - he leads all Wigan props in yards per carry this season and despite limited minutes with all but one appearance being off the bench, he has averaged 90 metres per game. His defence has been questioned, even by his coach, but it must be his positioning that was the problem because he is successful in 95% of his tackles. He didn't play against Hull FC the first time around this season, but I think this is an opportunity he wouldn't want to let pass him by. Whether he'll be selected or not, I'm not sure, but he has been going the right way about putting himself in the frame.

Tom Lineham - This is a player who on this season's form could have been named in the key players list. He has overshadowed his more experienced wing partner Tom Briscoe in more ways than one and it was arguably his 90m try than turned the semi-final around and provided Hull the impetus to go on and win. He is Hull's second top try scorer behind his centre partner Ben Crooks, who I could have picked out as well, but the real reason Lineham is singled out here is that he scored a hat-trick in the meeting between these sides at the KC. He has proved to be a threat to this strong Wigan defence.

Liam Watts - Watts is a player I've always liked the look of since he broke through with FC's cross-city rivals, although he doesn't seem to have reached his potential yet for what ever reason. Not many Hull players are making massive individual yards per game, but his 89m per game puts him second amongst the Hull props and he is also third best in tackles per game for FC, complementing this with a 95% tackle success. Watts had a good game against Wigan in April meeting between the sides, with 120 metres (2nd only to fullback McDonnell, and only by 4m) and 28 successful tackles.

I'm not going to make a prediction what with my team playing in the game, so all that's left to say is I hope everyone enjoys the game and as long as Rugby League is the winner then it should be a great occasion.

NOTE: All stats and rankings correct at time of publishing. Most stats adapted from Super League website.

A few suggestions to help Rugby League‏

A major criticism of the critics is that they never offer any solutions to the problems they comment on. I can be critical, but this is all about ideas that might help things progress a little.

I'm not suggesting I know more than the RFL or the clubs. I'm also not suggesting I have any qualification to comment on the state of things outside being an avid fan who cares about his favourite sport. However, I do think about it a lot, and here are a list of my thoughts about some incidental initiatives that might help the sport out a little:

• All full-time contracted players should be contractually obliged to make themselves available at least one afternoon or evening each week (from Jan to Sep lets say as a minimum standard) to visit local schools, amateur clubs, charities and youth groups. Part-time players at lower league clubs should also be imposed with some sort of obligation in their deals, but not to the same extent. I know clubs do have community foundations that do this type of work, which is great, buteven more involvement from the players in this type of work would be great for the game I think.
•  All full-time players must also be made available to meet local media on a regular basis (once a month?) and national media on a less regular basis (mandatory in week before big events, otherwise at least twice a season) - newspaper, radio and TV. Clubs should impose players on the media rather than wait for requests in order to help build anticipation for matches etc. Media exposure and coverage is one area we probably all feel our sport is a little let down in, particularly nationally, but making our star attractions more available should help in this area I'm sure.
• Major club news (transfers, coaching appointments etc) should be released through 'exclusive' reports in a national and a daily local newspaper with exclusive interview access to that person, rather than a generic club press release - similar arrangement should be made with a TV & radio news broadcaster for interview access. Press conferences should follow later in the week for more general access for reporting within the sport specific press in their Monday papers. Similar to the above point really, but I think giving the press more to go at and making more of the news events we do have will help increase interest.
• The RFL and clubs should use their own marketing or media relations staff to write copy for local papers who might not be able to afford the resources to dedicate time to reporting as much Rugby League as would be preferable. Basically the more exposure the better, and if the clubs have to do that themselves then thats what they should do.
• Every club should designate a player or coaching staff member to write a regular diary to their fans and also have players doing regular columns in the local newspaper. Same as the above really - I know Wigan do this through the website, I'm sure all the clubs at least do it through match day programmes, but more can't be bad.
•  High profile overseas players and England international players should be offered regularly and often to TV companies to appear on sports panel shows or celebrity TV specials (one-off things like pointless celebrities more than long series like I'm a celebrity). Clubs should be accommodating to releasing players for this too. I think we see more rugby league players on A Question of Sport than we realise, but you don't see them anywhere else really. The sport should be promoting its stars to the masses. The more recognisable faces, the more sponsors will come in.
  
• The RFL should contact its celebrity supporters and get them involved in promotional material for the game, even just a video clip sound bite or something. The RFL and the broadcasters should be building on things like Sky's advert with Bradley Wiggins. We seem to have plenty of people willing to make appearances at games when it suits them, and others happy to acknowledge they like the game. Lets get more of them doing what Sir Brad did.

Some of this might happen already and it isn't reported well enough for me to be aware of or there are things I haven't done looking for, but the game needs to sell itself to the people again, and that is done by forging a connection with the clubs and the players to the people.

That’s just a few simple things I thought of, mostly put together during a lunch break! I have some other thoughts related to structure and events that I've either already written about (read the other articles in my blog) or I'll be writing about soon, but this was just the little stuff I think could help.

Is 2013 Make or Break for England Rugby League? Should we go back to Great Britain?

I'll start by saying I loved the Great Britain test series' against Australia and New Zealand. I have Great Britain shirts, but no England Rugby League shirt. When I was getting into Rugby League around the turn of the millennium there was the awful World Cup for England, but then these great contests with Great Britain against the best in the world. Whilst I still attend England games now and want them to win, I miss the Lions fixtures. I won't let that stop me being objective though.

Richard De La Riviere's recent book 'Rugby League: A Critical History 1980-2013' (a highly recommended read) starts with a couple of chapters looking at the international game over the last 33 years.

Amongst all the things that need sorting out at the moment by the RFL, from the prominent placement in his book, it's pretty clear that this is one De La Riviere feels is important. It isn't something I've thought or commented a great deal on, but after reading his book I've been giving it more thought.

One thing that has kept coming up ever since the change came into effect after 2007, is that we should be going back to Great Britain. History, brand and fan support are often reasons given for doing this. De La Riviere makes a great point about the damage being done to the Celtic nations by all their qualified players preferring to target an England place as its the only way to consistently play against the Aussies and Kiwis.

Ironically, 'consistency' was the reason Richard Lewis felt the move to break up Great Britain was a good thing, saying "it has always been illogical that we play as Great Britain for three or four years, and when the World Cup comes along, suddenly we become England"

The decision was made before the 2013 World Cup to be held in the Northern Hemisphere had been finalised, but you have to think maximising chances of a home win whilst still developing a successful, viable tournament was a factor in the decision that was made back in 2005.

Great Britain went out on a high with a 3-0 series win against a (depleted) New Zealand side in their 2007 series. The England era started pretty woefully with the dismal 2008 World Cup. Although the side would have been broken up into England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland for that tournament anyway, it was a sign of things to come and despite a couple of wins on home soil against the Kiwis, results against the southern hemisphere sides have been largely disappointing - an aggregate of -98 in five games against Australia since 2009, with no wins.

The most reasonable explanation for breaking up the Lions brand and reverting to England Rugby League is that they wanted to build a 'club mentality' and develop a consistent group of players with an eye on giving it a strong push for the home World Cup. What happens if it doesn't work?

Well, I'll firstly suggest what good may have been done. Importantly, regular live BBC TV coverage has returned in the recent past after Sky monopolised the international coverage for the first decade or so of the Super League era. And, the BBC coverage is to continue through the next cycle of Four-Nations tournaments up to the 2017 World Cup. With such investment in the sport, you would hope BBC give the coverage a push year on year and greater national interest is generated.

Another commendable step has been the development of the Elite Training Squad concept. This has given the players more opportunity to meet up regularly and form some relationships that should prompt a more connected and cohesive unit on the field. The players certainly seem to enjoy it, although would probably be gagged from telling us if they felt it was a waste of time. Steve McNamara's recent trip to catch up with the NRL based players has been heavily criticised by fans, but I also think this is a good step to make sure there is some integration amongst the players who can't join up with the ETS on a regular basis.

Whilst those are positive recent developments, there are negatives to balance things out.

The loss to Ireland, Wales and Scotland of potential players, despite what Richard Lewis asserted in 2005, has been noted above and is better covered by De La Riviere's book. It certainly shouldn't be forgotten but isn't something I'm going to dwell on.

The other big negative point relates to the very defence of the switch made by Richard Lewis of 'consistency'. It also puts cracks in the ETS system. From 2008 to 2012, England have fielded 13 different starting half-back combinations in 24 internationals, and haven't played NRL winning stand-off Gareth Widdop in any of them. This isn't a new problem, GB had issues in consistently getting a play making partnership for years too, but is surely one the consistency and ETS system should have helped England solve. We're now going into the World Cup with the starting half-backs still an open question.

Although I've previously spoken up our chances of success, we'll still enter the 2013 World Cup as distant second/third favourites behind the Kangaroos. I wouldn't pick quite the same team I went for in November last year by the way, but that'll be for another time.

Surely though if England don't win the World Cup, or at the very least push Australia really close in the final, then the whole move from Great Britain has failed? 

Maybe, maybe not...I'll make one final observation before leaving you to make your own conclusions.

Crowd figures are something De La Riviere also goes into as an issue, and I will dwell on this a little. In all home non-World Cup games (but including the world cup rated tests of the late 1980s), during the GB era 1980 to 2007, gates averaged 21,473. In all England home internationals since 2007 (excluding Exiles games) the average drops to 19,144 - not bad considering a higher proportion of games against Wales and France. Now, the high ticket end of season Australia and New Zealand matches - GB 1980-2007, 25,764; England 2008-onwards (2009 & 2011 series), 28,919 - better as England, surprisingly so. What about just in Super League era versus the big boys? GB 1996-2007, 25,004 compared to that England figure of 28,919. (There is an average of 26,618 for GB 1980-1995 by the way, despite a number of 40,000+ crowds vs. Australia.)

Maybe the fans aren't as put off by the 'rebranding'. This possibly isn't the negative people have made out. From the criticisms I hear and read, I expected it to be. Crowds for the top international fixtures have remained fairly consistent between GB and England eras. It isn't a factor that should influence any future decisions either way, the fans still turn up.

Oh, and whatever you think about the name of our international side, I still recommend Richard De La Riviere's book.

Are Wigan Warriors a One Man Team?

Its all but confirmed that the reigning Man of Steel and brightest star in the European Super League galaxy is set to head down under, and its rightly causing some fear amongst Wigan fans. Everyone knows that Wigan don't pose the same threat without Tomkins, but are they really a one man team? And how do Wigan without their key player compare to other teams missing their key players?

I've picked two players from each of the four most consistently successful teams since 2009 (the only teams to reach more than one final, GF and CC combined) - Wigan, St Helens, Leeds and Warrington. I've picked what I deemed based on generally observed opinion to be the the most key forward and most key back for each team during that full period - four of the players have been the regular captains over that time, and the others have all fulfilled that role at times, and yes I see Kevin Sinfield as a back, he is a tall halfback or standoff and has never really been a loose forward! Finally, the data runs from Round 19 in 2009, which is the week after Sam came off the bench following Tim Smith injuring his arm to lead Wigan to a win at Hull KR in front of the Sky TV cameras, largely seen as Sam's announcement and leading to him nailing a regular starting place. It runs to Round 20 2013 because this was the last round before I pulled the data together. Data is largely adapted from the excellent Rugby League Project website.




Based solely on the numbers it does support the suggestion that Wigan are a one man team, and that one man is Sam Tomkins, winning over 80% of games with him in the line up, but only 25% when he is missing. This is by far the most significant difference in results for any of the players looked at. The only other player who seems to make his team notably worse off when he isn't there is James Roby, with Saints winning two-thirds of games he plays, but only half when he doesn't play.

Sean O'Loughlin is felt to be at least as important to the team as Sam Tomkins by many Wigan fans, but the stats don't bare that out. Along with both Sinfield and Peacock over in Leeds, Lockers doesn't seem to have a major impact on his team when he is missing - the figures are similar whether he plays or he doesn't, only slightly better performance is seen when these three players play.

Over at Warrington, however, captain Morley and legend Briers don't seem to matter that much at all. In fact the team seems to perform a little better without them in it, and there are a good number of games where both of them have missed the same fixtures and the team has still kept up their winning standards. And then this leaves Paul Wellens, St Helens co-captain for a number of years and key defensive and try scoring presence at fullback, or maybe not - the team seem to be 12% more likely to win without him playing.

Now, numbers don't lie, but you do often need to go beyond the headline figures to see the real story being told. Lee Briers has missed a third of Wire's games and Morley a quarter, so the numbers for these players must be pretty robust. However, Warrington have been building a squad to replace these elder-statesmen and having missed them for large amounts of games have had the opportunity to put active structures in place to deal with their absence.They haven't missed a Wigan game and missed only 1 Leeds games each - they tend to play in the tougher fixtures and miss more of the straightforward ones.

St Helen's losses without Wellens were against Wigan, Warrington, Leeds and Catalans, all teams they could have lost to with or without him. The only notable wins were away at Warrington this season (when both Morley and Briers were both out) and away at Huddersfield in 2010. Lots of the wins without him were against teams like Salford, London and Castleford, who haven't troubled the playoffs of late. The numbers look like they don't need him, but then the detail suggests that maybe he is just another player in the squad and shouldn't be seen as key is all - he's just happened to miss mostly games against top teams that St Helens might well have lost anyway, skewing the data.

The Roby case is different. It's pretty even for both wins and losses against stronger teams and weaker teams, so it wouldn't be fair to say the losses have been to top teams and wins against poor teams, where you could have argued Roby's absence may have little real impact. Looking deeper in fact, it looks worse. When Keiron Cunningham was still around Saints won all three games Roby missed in the period observed. Since Cunningham retired at the end of 2010 and Roby became THE hooker in St Helens, they have won 5 and lost 8 (38% win) without Roby, with losses to Bradford, Widnes, London, Hull FC and Hull KR as well as Wigan, Warrington and Catalan. I wouldn't say they are a one man team, there isn't enough data here to show that, but Roby really seems to be key to St Helens.

Sinfield has only missed 11 games, and three of the losses have been away games at Wigan and Huddersfield (twice). It would appear that where Sinfield is concerned Leeds aren't a one man team, the small number of games missed however means we can't really draw any strong conclusions. Peacock missing games has a little more impact, and he has missed a high amount of games so firmer conclusions can be drawn. You can't conclude that they are a one man Jamie Peacock team though, he doesn't make enough difference as they still win most games without him. One interesting point though is Leeds have won three Grand Finals during this time period, the one time they didn't win it was the year Jamie Peacock didn't play in the playoffs due to injury.

O'Loughlin is very similar to the Leeds pair in that Wigan have won and lost against strong and weaker teams in Super League without him. Looking in more depth doesn't make it conclusive that he is essential, although it can't be said that he is unimportant either.

So far we haven't proved any one of the 'key' players identified makes a one man team, the closest we've come is James Roby. So lets go back to the player who started this all off. Are Wigan Warriors a one man Sam Tomkins team? The headline numbers do make it look that way, although the sample is so small that it can not be conclusive. Only 10 games have been played without Sam. However, 7 losses are joined by a scrappy 1 point win at Widnes in 2013 and a scratchy draw at Castleford in 2011 - a good 20-4 win at Huddersfield in 2011 (also without Pat Richards) is the only real exception.

The small sample is very suggestive. If you break it down a bit more though, some potential explanatory features emerge. Firstly, although you could argue he helped greatly in making Sam what he is in switching him to fullback, Michael Maguire was very lucky with Sam. He played every Super League game of the league leading, final winning 2010 season and only missed two games in 2011. However, Michael Maguire's Wigan didn't lose either of those two games as they found other ways to play without the key strike fullback weapon. Shaun Wane maybe hasn't been so lucky with Sam missing 7 games for him in just over a season and a half, including probably his biggest game in charge to date - the 2012 playoff semi-final against Leeds. Wane may miss Sam even more because his attacking structures seem to work towards Sam's skills - watching them, Sam seems almost essential. Maybe Wigan aren't a one man team, they are a key man team - especially in attack, where in four of the games he's missed they have definitely struggled to score.

Now Sam is a great player, why wouldn't you make him key to what you do with the ball, you'll clearly score more tries by getting him into space with ball in hand. But maybe this still doesn't explain the problem Wigan have faced when he is out, particularly under Wane. Unlike players such as Wellens, Morley and Briers who have tended to miss games in groups or bunches, Sam has never missed two games consecutively in this period. Now, that creates the opposite problem Warrington have faced - if a key player misses the odd game here and there you can't effectively plan for games without them, there isn't the training time between games. The real test would be what Wigan do if this key player is missing for a bunch of games. Surely they will adapt to not having such an incredible strike weapon. Its a test it looks like Wigan will have to face in 2014 when Sam is likely to be proving how key he is for the other Warriors down under.

There you have it I suppose. There are some really key players at the top teams, but no team appears to be a one man team, even Wigan and Sam Tomkins, they just haven't had much chance to prove it yet!