NO MORE FRONT ROWERS

[Bendy Hendy]

In todays paper, the new owner says he is not looking to buy any more front rowers. He says he is happy with who we have. The rest of the cap money will be spent on an outside back. Possibly Karl Price as long as his yawnion club dont want any compo for him quiting his contract early. Apparantley it was Lenaghan who put the brakes on Chev Walker coming, because of this reason.

[GeoffN]

Bendy Hendy posted:
In todays paper, the new owner says he is not looking to buy any more front rowers. He says he is happy with who we have. The rest of the cap money will be spent on an outside back. Possibly Karl Price as long as his yawnion club dont want any compo for him quiting his contract early. Apparantley it was Lenaghan who put the brakes on Chev Walker coming, because of this reason.

Link here:

http://www.wigantoday.net/warriors-news ... 3489598.jp

Ian Lenagan has revealed he has no plans to bring in any front row forwards for next season.

Lenagan added: "Our next signing will be someone who can play centre or outside back because this is where we need to strengthen.

[DaveO]

Bendy Hendy posted:
Possibly Karl Price as long as his yawnion club dont want any compo for him quiting his contract early. Apparantley it was Lenaghan who put the brakes on Chev Walker coming, because of this reason.

It is speculation that IL pulled the plug on the Walker deal because of the fee. The article reads:

"It is widely believed it was Lenagan who pulled the plug on a deal to bring Chev Walker to the JJB at the end of last season after Bath RU Club demanded a large severance payment."

So in other words they are just repeating the rumour that he pulled the plug for that reason.

If Pryce is the target and we can fit his wages under the salary cap then I will be very disappointed if IL does not dip into his pocket to pay a transfer fee. There is no point having a wealthy owner if they won't spend money on the club.

As to there being no more front row recruits this ought not to be a surprise to anyone given where the gaps are in the team. It was obvious with so little money to spend and with Coley already on the books we would be looking for backs not props.

For next season how we go will largely depend on Fielden, Coley's and Feka's form. If the first two play as they did in 2007 and if Feka remains a 10 minute wonder you can forget it.

Dave

[Bear]

Front rowers should switch every 12 minuites For impact. Could this be the reason feilden diddnt play as hard as he could. Because we were relying on him to play 80 mins. I would much rather props come off the bench in bursts

[gpartin]

Bear posted:
Front rowers should switch every 12 minuites For impact. Could this be the reason feilden diddnt play as hard as he could. Because we were relying on him to play 80 mins. I would much rather props come off the bench in bursts

Spot on Bear, you can't expect props to play full games and have a noticable impact.

[DaveO]

Bear posted:
Front rowers should switch every 12 minuites For impact.

You can't do that with only three props in the side!

In Wigan's case Feka can do 15 minutes a half and that is it. That means one prop will have to do the full 40 and the other 25 or some combination thereof.

Could this be the reason feilden diddnt play as hard as he could. Because we were relying on him to play 80 mins. I would much rather props come off the bench in bursts

Playing 80 minutes is not a requirement but being able to play for 20 minutes a half as a prop is.

Given teams normally go with three props any prop who can't do that places too much onus on the other two to play the majority of the game.

So if you want Fielden to have more impact by playing less game time we need props who can play for longer to give him a rest.

Feka was not able to do that last season.

I would also say coming on for 12 minutes and then going off is tactically disruptive as each player will need to get up to speed each time they come on. It is too short a time to make any impact IMO. It is about 4 sets of six tackles (if that), that is all.

Dave

[shawcross da warrior]

i woull raher us by a front rower than a back to be honest you dnt have to be vastly experianced to play inthe baks and gouding ticks all theboxes for me give him a go...

[standishwarrior]

DaveO posted:

Bear posted:
Front rowers should switch every 12 minuites For impact.

You can't do that with only three props in the side!

In Wigan's case Feka can do 15 minutes a half and that is it. That means one prop will have to do the full 40 and the other 25 or some combination thereof.

Could this be the reason feilden diddnt play as hard as he could. Because we were relying on him to play 80 mins. I would much rather props come off the bench in bursts

Playing 80 minutes is not a requirement but being able to play for 20 minutes a half as a prop is.

Given teams normally go with three props any prop who can't do that places too much onus on the other two to play the majority of the game.

So if you want Fielden to have more impact by playing less game time we need props who can play for longer to give him a rest.

Feka was not able to do that last season.

I would also say coming on for 12 minutes and then going off is tactically disruptive as each player will need to get up to speed each time they come on. It is too short a time to make any impact IMO. It is about 4 sets of six tackles (if that), that is all.

Dave

rubbish!you can get 4 stints out of feka. 15mins at the start of the half and the last ten mins of that half. then 2nd half same again if he's not capable of that then wigan need get him fitter maybe loose abit of his size.

imo wigan mite go with 4 props next year and have a bench, barring injuries of coley prescott mclorum and gouding,

[DaveO]

standishwarrior posted:
rubbish!you can get 4 stints out of feka.

It is not "rubbish". It was a rare event for Feka to do 25 minutes a half last season if it happened at all!

imo wigan mite go with 4 props next year and have a bench, barring injuries of coley prescott mclorum and gouding,

They might but when Wigan go with three props 12 minute stints as was suggested previously is not going to work with Feka as one of them.

Dave

[DaveO]

shawcross da warrior posted:
i woull raher us by a front rower than a back to be honest you dnt have to be vastly experianced to play inthe baks and gouding ticks all theboxes for me give him a go...

This is why you are not in charge at Wigan

As Lenagan pointed out we have seven props at the club (who will be drawing wages against the salary cap) and clearly Coley is considered a prop. If we got another prop O'Carroll and Prescott would never get a look in.

That said I don't think using Coley as a prop was the real plan. He was IMO a direct replacement for Fletcher and were he to be used like that then we would need another prop. The fact he isn't going to be means we don't need another prop.

As to Goulding ticking the boxes that is open to debate as to him being ready for a full season but even if he is, what happens if him or Bailey get injured? We have no cover whereas in the forwards we have plenty of options. We need another back for that reason alone.

Dave