Batemans's departure confirmed

[morley pie eater]

Unless we do sign a hooker I can't see O'niel not getting that plenty game time. Him pushing to get in is exactly what we need. If you look at ball players we could use French at Fullback and push Field into the halves, obviously as things stand it will be Smith Cust we start games with.
If we was desperate O'niel to 9 and Powel in the halves or I would rather give Astley that chance.
That's a very similar position to how Saints run, a half goes down it's probably Welsby going 6 and move someone else to one. You may say Welsby is a better 6 than Field but French is definitely the best back up 1 in SL. I would say he's in the top 3 full stop. If Miski is still here I also believe he's one of the best back up wings which is another plus over Saints. They pull it back with Hurrell though saints two first choice centers are a worry injury wise so you could say Hurrell is first choice. We have not seen it much yet but running a French Field Smith Cust 1, 6, 7 and 9 respectively combo may be very good. Centre cover we will have Thornley and Isa who could both also cover right second row if KPP goes down. KPP replacing Bateman is about as good as we could do from a British SL player. For me I still believe while still maybe a dominant middle shy this squads better balanced and I agree no panic is needed to replace Batty.

I'm always sceptical of suggestions of switching players, but then again, Cust to 9 is largely unproven, so you could be right.

My main comment is this: consider your 6,7,9 in defence. Apart from minor positional changes, you effectively replace Powell with Field in the defensive line. Which would you rather have?

[lucky 13]

I was only meaning a need may arise and that to a degree we have some cover alluding to a better balance of squad like Saints run with, even without Batty. Sometimes a needs must situation can bring something to a team or player.
Long term we will need to either bring in another 9 to play back up if O'Neil cements himself or as a first choice if we need.
As to which I would rather have I would need to see it my hope would be we wouldn't be worrying about the other team so much
I'm not a Powel critic I think he gives it his all and is a good guy around the group.
I also believe he's better than many think he is, but I also still think we could get more from that position ball in hand.

[jaws1]

Unless we do sign a hooker I can't see O'niel not getting that plenty game time. Him pushing to get in is exactly what we need. If you look at ball players we could use French at Fullback and push Field into the halves, obviously as things stand it will be Smith Cust we start games with.
If we was desperate O'niel to 9 and Powel in the halves or I would rather give Astley that chance.
That's a very similar position to how Saints run, a half goes down it's probably Welsby going 6 and move someone else to one. You may say Welsby is a better 6 than Field but French is definitely the best back up 1 in SL. I would say he's in the top 3 full stop. If Miski is still here I also believe he's one of the best back up wings which is another plus over Saints. They pull it back with Hurrell though saints two first choice centers are a worry injury wise so you could say Hurrell is first choice. We have not seen it much yet but running a French Field Smith Cust 1, 6, 7 and 9 respectively combo may be very good. Centre cover we will have Thornley and Isa who could both also cover right second row if KPP goes down. KPP replacing Bateman is about as good as we could do from a British SL player. For me I still believe while still maybe a dominant middle shy this squads better balanced and I agree no panic is needed to replace Batty.

I'm always sceptical of suggestions of switching players, but then again, Cust to 9 is largely unproven, so you could be right.

My main comment is this: consider your 6,7,9 in defence. Apart from minor positional changes, you effectively replace Powell with Field in the defensive line. Which would you rather have?

xCust has played hooker in the NRL on many occasions.

[jaws1]

Cade Cust at hooker https://www.espn.co.uk/nrl/story/_/id/3 ... all-stars

[DaveO]

I do wonder why Wigan didn’t hold Bateman to the same agreement they had with Zak Hardaker last year. They gave Hardaker a time period to find a new club. Surely we could have held Bateman to his contract if there was no possibility of a replacement?

And before the sarcastic comments come in I know JB has a typed poorly but he isn’t Zak Hardaker

We missed out on any transfer fee in the hardaker situation.

Money talks and all that.

Zak Hardaker was a problem player in the end but I have always thought the reason the club signed a player for X years was because they wanted them here for X years, not to sell them on after X-2 or whatever.

It must be a nightmare being a coach if you set your plans out based on contracts and then they have to be ripped up because of issues like this.

I think it would be great if it were possible to have a clause in players contracts that said if they start on about asking to leave formally as Bateman apparently did, the club is free to look for a replacement and if the club finds one, they can simply cut the player and tell him to go and find his new club without having to pay him off.

Yes the club would not get a fee but they would not be left without a suitable player either. At the moment the ball is always in the players court. If Bateman had not been able to get a deal in Oz you can guarantee he’d still be a Wigan player getting paid his marquee wage whether he was on top form or not.

Contracts are a safety net for players but the club has none.

Unfortunately Wigan are relative paupers so the chance of a fee is always hard to resist but we need to get to a situation where it isn’t. This is not a salary cap issue but one of being able to afford to hold a player to his contract (or cut him as I suggested) and not bother if the club doesn’t get a fee. The club isn’t wealthy enough to do that under IL so it needs a serious cash injection to allow it to play hard ball on contracts. Maybe longer term the ING involvement will increase the income sufficiently to allow this.

[Suzieb]

Bateman has now burned his bridges with us no loyalty towards us at all can we please move on and forget about him please

[morley pie eater]

I was only meaning a need may arise and that to a degree we have some cover alluding to a better balance of squad like Saints run with, even without Batty. Sometimes a needs must situation can bring something to a team or player.
Long term we will need to either bring in another 9 to play back up if O'Neil cements himself or as a first choice if we need.
As to which I would rather have I would need to see it my hope would be we wouldn't be worrying about the other team so much
I'm not a Powel critic I think he gives it his all and is a good guy around the group.
I also believe he's better than many think he is, but I also still think we could get more from that position ball in hand.

[morley pie eater]

Cade Cust at hooker https://www.espn.co.uk/nrl/story/_/id/3 ... all-stars

Interesting,thanks.

I don't follow the NRL, so wasn't aware of this. It does say "Cust himself still lists the halves as his preferred position", and I agree with lucky 13 above that he can provide cover there if necessary. As to our future/regular 9, let's see how O'Neill goes this year.

I think Peet rightly ran with what he had last season, but should have a clearer idea and more influence over future direction providing we're competitive this year.

Maybe wishful thinking, but Saints could have peaked, but Leeds are on the horizon.

[Southern Softy]

It's a fairly false position to say that Cust can cover No 9. If he does - who plays in his proper role alongside Harry Smith? Or are we expecting Tommy to dubbin those boots again?
In a way, it may not matter because we are a much better side with Smith and Cust playing together and our potency falls off alarmingly when one or the other isn't there.
I'd rather have O'Neill at No 9 but I'll settle for Sam Powell to keep the halves as they are.

[lucky 13]

If Cust was to play 9 it would be more than likely down to injury. For example if we only had one hooker in the team . Or with some bad luck and neither Powell or O'Neil was available then simple thing would be Cust to 9 with Field to 6 and French to 1. Either situation is not exactly a stretch to imagine and I don't think it's a false position to see that happen. I can't see Tommy boots going back on we also have Astley and Forber in the squad.