Darrell Goulding

[weststand-rich]

Well he was good enough at one point to be given the number 3 shirt. I guess we'll see next season how he shapes after recovering from his shoulder reconstruction.

[lucky 13]

When he was playing at junior level against Aus, a few of the Melbourne players who are now super stars where outplayed by him.
I also remember him giving Senior a lot of problems when he first came in the team.
Since then we have had a coach who whenever the teams played bad has dropped Goulding!! now I for one would have blaimed higher profile, more expierenced, better payed players but what do I know.
It's been the same with Ocarol and now with Ainscough!! highlite a young kids mistake and drop them, will that help them??
Think Goulding has been made a skapegoat and others who's play has been more responsible for poor games have got off free.
I'm now looking forward and hoping that the new coach can help and sculpture the raw talent into the finished player. Not drop them, hold them back and kick every last ounce of self belief out of them.

I think all the above is fair comment which is why I said all the young players have reason to be optimistic. I think Goulding and Ainscough have most to look forward to with a change of coach. Don't forget Noble didn't drop O'Carroll last season he got a bad injury.

Dave

Think he got injured when playing reserve rugby, at Salford before the first team game? he had been our best prop in my opinion to that point. If we had not lost Hock Mossop would have had no game time, and I suspect both Tomkins would have had a lot fewer games without injuries to Smith, Baily and Lockers.
I do understand that young players are often held back by senior playeRs, but to have a policy of playing the same faces even if they are way off form when you have good talent waiting in the wings is mind blowing. People seem to have taken the bait and jumped on board the "It's Gouldings Fault" line and even though he may have been inconspicuous at times I can not remember him playing as bad as Roberts for example in the semi against Wire, who even then seemed imune from such things.

[superleague]

yes o'carrol was dropped and got injured

[lucky 13]

Whilst he was very promising as a junior; he has never really carried that through into his senior performances. Whilst he was wrongly dropped by Noble; he did have some very forgettable games in defence for us. Also he seemed a bit selfish with the ball - going himself rather than releasing his winger.

I would imagine that he will get at least another year at Wigan to regain his junior form.

He may or may not make it but I feel that it's as much to do with poor coaching than the lads talent, think this showed on his return from Salford better defense and a happier looking player....... Why?
Look at the Ainscough thing this season for the first time in a few years I was on the edge of my seat when the ball came towards one of our wingers, Ok mistakes but good yards and try after try to make up for it. For a winger ;and a young one : I can take a little of that.
It did not need stateing in public that he was poor under a high ball not because it highlighted it to other teams they knew already but for the lads well being!! nothings better than a few words of praise from your coach in public, the faults he needed sorting could have been worked on in private.
Have many of our players who looked great at junior level improved under this duty of care rubish? I would say those that have, have done so inspite of it rather than because of it. We should not expect every player who's a great junior player to become a world beater but at least a small amount should continue to improve.
I also think that goes for the senior players are any better now than when they arrived? Richards may be the only one and thats not good enough.

[josie andrews]

Dave beg to differ but i thought O'Carroll got his injury playing in the reserves AFTER he had been dropped.

That's correct Jaws

[jackoh]

Matt I agree with your last comment about Goulding he was very selfish with the ball , we used to say he wanted a ball for himself .
If the new coach can`t turn him round then he`ll have to go , it`s pointles having a centre who won`t or can`t pass the ball to his winger .
He`s certainly not fast enough to be a winger ,
So he`ll probrably leave , turn his game around and make us regret losing him .
However what he`s showing now isn`t enough , when we`re looking at losing the likes of Carmont just because of his age .

[GeoffN]

Matt I agree with your last comment about Goulding he was very selfish with the ball , we used to say he wanted a ball for himself .
If the new coach can`t turn him round then he`ll have to go , it`s pointles having a centre who won`t or can`t pass the ball to his winger .
He`s certainly not fast enough to be a winger ,
So he`ll probrably leave , turn his game around and make us regret losing him .
However what he`s showing now isn`t enough , when we`re looking at losing the likes of Carmont just because of his age .

"Just because of his age"?

By that argument, we'd still have Hanley, Boston, Farrell etc playing for us. All players come to a point where they're past their best, either through age or injury, or a combination of the two.

It would be a massive gamble to give a two-year contract to George, at his age, and with his injuries.

[Matthew]

"Just because of his age"?

By that argument, we'd still have Hanley, Boston, Farrell etc playing for us. All players come to a point where they're past their best, either through age or injury, or a combination of the two.

Sorry Geoff; I don't agree with you on this one. None of the players that you list are still playing; so the comparison is a bit off. What's more; would you rather have a past his best Farrell (as he was in his last year with us) playing for us, or a prime Bryn Hargreaves?

It would be a massive gamble to give a two-year contract to George, at his age, and with his injuries.

Again I disagree. All contracts are a gamble of sorts; all players can suffer season or career ending injuries. O'Carroll suffered a season ending injury this year.

Even when George has played through the pain barrier for us, he has still been consistently one of our best performers. At the end of last year Pat said that he was the best centre he had ever played with and this is a guy who won a grand final in the NRL.

Everyone agrees that next years contract should be a given. So the only gamble is that he may not play as much in the second year - which considering we will be probably trying to bring Goulding and the other young centre (Thornley?) into the team will probably be the case anyway.

What's to say that Goulding will play as well as George would next year? He's not big enough to blast through tacklers and he isn't fast enough to beat wingers for pace. Pat is our top try scorer - how do you think he gets the ball? George is our joint second highest try scorer; so he's no slouch when it comes to crossing the try line himself.

Realistically; whoever replaces George will partner Pat, as Gleeson is needed to defend for Amos and I fear that if that someone is Goulding then Pat will hardly ever see the ball.

Goulding for George next season will in my opinion weaken the team and considering what George is rumoured to be on; we're talking peanuts compared to the other senior players. Fielden leaving will free up a large portion of the cap in his second year anyway; so there should still be money available to sign other players. Which other senior back's are paid less than George? Do you think that Gleeson, Amos, Pat, Tommy earn less?

[josie andrews]

George didn't start playing professionally till a relatively late age, so I don't think his body has had the ravishings of most other players to be fair.

Even tho'he has suffered a couple of injuries, his contribution to the Wigan cause has been exemplary, and I would like him to have a new contract for two years, as said before he would probably play less games in the second year to enable the young centres time to get experience in SL

[butt monkey]

You are both missing Geoff's point!

Whilst there is no argument that he offered "value for money" and gave some creditable performances this season, George was not as brilliant as he was in his debut.

Why? A few possible reason could be that he did appear to be constantly hampered by a leg injury throughout the season and his form was also more sporadic (this could have been the reason why) or was it that he felt he shouldn't "try" as much as others on higher wages were getting paid more for lesser performance?

If George gets the 2 year (which seems unlikely as other players out of contract have already renegotiated or moved onto pastures new), he "might" recapture the form of his debut season. However, given the fact this season that he has been hampered with (and played with) injuries, on a personal level, I do wonder if the fact he did only have a short contract time left that this played on his decisions to actually "soldier on"?

Remember that George will not only be taking a quota spot (at the time it is reducing), but also forcing a junior player out of the club during the same time (does anyone seriously expect Goulding to wait another 2 seasons for a chance?)

The excuse that he was a "late starter" in the game doesn't "wash" either, otherwise my Grandad would have been a "world beater" in professional soccer based on the fact he only started to play in his 50's and as such didn't come into the game with injuries - just was more susceptible to them due to age!