If Lam leaves

[Charriots Offiah]

He has been criticised in other topics. I honestly think that Rads is lost without Wane.

[Caboosegg]

Just read through the whole thread. We have criticism of Lam, of Leneghan, and of a number of players.

Where does Radlinski fit in? What is his part in the successes/failures of his time here? The signings, the players who left, the ones who stayed - Sam T, Micky Mac, Tommy playing on, the coaching/fitness staff, the Edwards saga, and so on and so on.

I don't know the answers, but two things strike me about Radders:

1. For someone who has been in such an influential position for so long, he rarely gets a mention on here.

2. Surely, given IL's lack of rugby experience or knowledge, he relies on Radlinski for the rugby-related decisions.

I'm genuinely baffled...can anyone help?

Rads always gets mentioned..

[morley pie eater]

Ok, I'll re-phrase the question:

To what extent is Radlinski responsible for Lam's appointment and retention, players who have left, signings, and other factors affecting the team's performance?

[morley pie eater]

Btw, I'm asking a genuine question and am not implying anything about Rads. I don't know the answer but am truly puzzled as to how Leneghan and Lam seem to carry the can for perceived mistakes/failures with very little 'blame' attached to Radlinski.

My understanding, or guess, would be that he should have the main responsibility for signings and departures, in consultation with IL and AL of course. Am I wrong? If not, what about Sam T, Micky Mac, Tom Davies, Bullock all going and Clark, Hanks, and more recent signings. What part did KR play?

[Charriots Offiah]

Btw, I'm asking a genuine question and am not implying anything about Rads. I don't know the answer but am truly puzzled as to how Leneghan and Lam seem to carry the can for perceived mistakes/failures with very little 'blame' attached to Radlinski.

My understanding, or guess, would be that he should have the main responsibility for signings and departures, in consultation with IL and AL of course. Am I wrong? If not, what about Sam T, Micky Mac, Tom Davies, Bullock all going and Clark, Hanks, and more recent signings. What part did KR play?

You are spot on.

[fozzieskem]

Btw, I'm asking a genuine question and am not implying anything about Rads. I don't know the answer but am truly puzzled as to how Leneghan and Lam seem to carry the can for perceived mistakes/failures with very little 'blame' attached to Radlinski.

My understanding, or guess, would be that he should have the main responsibility for signings and departures, in consultation with IL and AL of course. Am I wrong? If not, what about Sam T, Micky Mac, Tom Davies, Bullock all going and Clark, Hanks, and more recent signings. What part did KR play?

It’s a good post Morley to me a coach should be the one picking out players to sign and while the money side of things can be handled by other people.

KR does seem to fly under the radar of peoples ire yes we all blame him but blame him for what as his role is so undefined to me at least,while I don’t subscribe to the lose a couple of games and you’re sacked I do subscribe to not letting a coach who clearly has little idea other than the “give it to French or Hastings”school of attack anywhere near Wigan’s first team but who is the one who’s going to pull the plug,KR or IL?again it’s down to how much power does he wield?

[CheshireWarrior]

Just read through the whole thread. We have criticism of Lam, of Leneghan, and of a number of players.

Where does Radlinski fit in? What is his part in the successes/failures of his time here? The signings, the players who left, the ones who stayed - Sam T, Micky Mac, Tommy playing on, the coaching/fitness staff, the Edwards saga, and so on and so on.

I don't know the answers, but two things strike me about Radders:

1. For someone who has been in such an influential position for so long, he rarely gets a mention on here.

2. Surely, given IL's lack of rugby experience or knowledge, he relies on Radlinski for the rugby-related decisions.

I'm genuinely baffled...can anyone help?

Think this is a very important post IMO!

I have no connection with the club, nor do I have any internal contacts, maybe people who have frequent inside information can clarify this?

Listed as an executive director, it's a grand title, but in Wigan Rugby terms......what does it mean?

Head Coach and Chairman are exactly what it says on the tin IMO. I wonder how Radlinski filters into a triangle and in what capacity? Does he have more influence and or more responsibility since Wanes departures or the same throughout his tenure?

I really don't think Lam should be highlighted as the main protagonist in any of the clubs failings, especially when there are areas (such as Radlinski), which I don't think are transparent enough.

As I said, I think I'm like yourself, curious to understand the dynamics and how or if its works.

[DaveO]

Btw, I'm asking a genuine question and am not implying anything about Rads. I don't know the answer but am truly puzzled as to how Leneghan and Lam seem to carry the can for perceived mistakes/failures with very little 'blame' attached to Radlinski.

My understanding, or guess, would be that he should have the main responsibility for signings and departures, in consultation with IL and AL of course. Am I wrong? If not, what about Sam T, Micky Mac, Tom Davies, Bullock all going and Clark, Hanks, and more recent signings. What part did KR play?

Until recently Rads was in my opinion very visible. It was always Rads who was discussing new signings and player related issues. I also think he was getting equal if not more stick for recruitment than IL or Lam. His comments on Clark are now infamous!

He's been very quiet lately but then so has the rest of the club. I haven't seen a public comment from IL for ages.

How much part does Rads play? Well we don't know but I think most people have long since concluded whoever is Wigan coach they have very little say over signings so it's between Rads and IL and so they are both equally culpable in my opinion but if I had to say who is the major partner in the pair it's IL. I have always thought Rads was a bit of a yes man.

One of the biggest and worst differences between this regime and the Maurice Lindsay regime (first time around with the gang of four) which I have mentioned before is the seeming abandonment of the constant improvement philosophy where if a better player became available the club would have no compunction at making a move for them and offloading the incumbent. That doesn't happen any more with it almost being the default option to renew players contracts without looking to see if something better is available at the time. If this is down to Rads then IL is letting Rads run the show to the detriment of the club. If it's not then it's IL who mandates this and he's at fault.

What it boils down to is if Rads is to blame more than people seem to think on here then IL is to blame for keeping him in his post as the buck stops at the top.

[josie andrews]

I actually feel sorry for Lammy he doesn’t look very happy ATM whether it’s all the BS going on behind the scenes or not, for his own integrity & peace of mind I’d leave now. But he won’t because he is the kind of guy who will see it out until the very end.

[ian.birchall]

We will all have a party.