Are Phelps days numbered?

[GeoffN]

Don't agree that Carmont should be worried - I think he would be greatly missed.

Regards quota, is Richard's included as he has an Irish passport. Same with Lulu, hasn't he been playing over here long enough to be off the quota?

You're correct. There are two separate quotas, though. The issue (for us) is not so much the overseas quota but the "non-federation-trained" quota, which reduces from 6 to 5 next year. Players already in SL before the non-fed rule came in are exempt, which means Richards, Bailey, Carmont & Feca don't count, and neither does TL, who was with Quins at the relevant age.

So, our only quota players are Riddell, Roberts & Phelps. We can sign two more Aussies before we need to worry about either quota restriction coming into the equation.

[jao711]

have you nothing else to worry about jao711

[Matthew]

Don't agree that Carmont should be worried - I think he would be greatly missed.

Regards quota, is Richard's included as he has an Irish passport. Same with Lulu, hasn't he been playing over here long enough to be off the quota?

Carmont has a contract for next year dependent on him playing an unspecified number of games. I think that it is likely that George will get the extra year but will play more as cover.

There are a number of players that are "playing for contracts" this year.

[DaveO]

I've been pleasantly surprised with Phelps at times this year and the odd time last year but only from a really low base. Just can't see him in MM's future plans and rightly so. If he was a young lad learning the ropes then fair enough but as a quota player, probably on a fair few quid, he's nowhere near good enough imo. I think this argument is what certain people particularly on RLFans can't see.

There has been a thread on there in recent days that started out not dissimilar to this one with the suggestion he may not get a new deal IIRC. Plenty came to Phelps defence and the O/P then caved in a bit. Threads tend to go like that for fear of getting picked on by a certain set of posters who can so no faults in any Wigan player IMO (unless they have to make a choice between their favourite and another with Ainscough the usual victim).

However, that aside I actually think the fact Phelps is a quota player is now no longer a big issue. The reason is I am pretty sure we have not used up all our quota spots this year and I would not be surprised if the same were true next year in order to allow the home-grown younger players to progress.

That its not just all about having a team full of Wiganers but quota players rightly have to considerably outperform their British rivals.

Yes there is no point blocking the progress of young talent if the overseas player is merely an average player. Does Phelps fall into that category? I think how good Phepls is himself (as opposed to him also being quota) is the main issue.

The one that's cropped up a bit this year is that a player being good this year justifies the player being picked last year, what utter garbage.

I think there is a great desire to say "I told you so" in Roberts and/or Riddell cases but anyone who thinks MM would have picked either of them week in, week out in 2009 had he been our coach based on their last seasons form is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Dave

[Shaun1967]

I'm surprised Gareth Widdop's name hasn't cropped up yet in this thread.

[cpwigan]

An interesting aspect of the Phelps v Amos dilemna is that many pro Phelps fans argue he is the better team player/link/passer call it what you want but IMO some of the passes thrown by Amos pre injury were different class whilst his threat with ball in hand is on a different level. Defensively, Amos seems far better too.

So you are left with an overseas player who is what? 25 now offering utility value. A value I am not convinced about. He found a niche at fullback but centre for example he was poor. You then have a younger player with more utility potential in Stefan Marsh and probably more potential full stop. Likewise Charnley and for all his defensive weakness you would probably opt for Ainsy over Phelps for a wing spot. Goulding is now offering a great deal and is of the right age experience to do so. You have Ian Thornley in the background too. So we are not lacking in choices.

You also at some point have to perhaps free what on their own appear reasonably small salary cap wages that when put together provide a decent salary cap amount for Madge to get a player who he thinks can make a real difference to the first XVII week in week out.

The emergence of the real Amos Roberts has been great news for everybody bar Cameron Phelps.

[OJ]

If you are looking for someone to get rid of Karl Price and Feka should be ahead of this lad in the queue every day of the week. Phelps didn't get awarded the coverted No 1 shirt for nothing and until the injury had been one of our stand out players and was actually heading for MOM in the game where he had to come off at half time. From when he first joined us he has been lively, interested and enthusiastic three words you could not have awarded to many of his team mates last year. Keep him for me 100% unless the management of the cap etc would result in us losing one of our promising youngsters as a result but seeing as we are not and never will be privvy to that info the discussion is just damaging to a good player.

[Dobby]

I dont think that Phelps should be retained simply because he is not good enough. Some have rated him from the first day that he came, no matter how he has played. I am fairly certain that this is largely because he has an Australian accent, kisses the badge a lot and says the right things to fans. The fact that a recent poll on RLFans said he was the most friendly player says it all to me. These are not reasons for retaining a player.

Roberts is twice the full back that Phelps will ever be and I just cant see why some rate Phelps like they do in this position. I haven't seen him do anything that other decent full backs cant do and he cant do most of the things that they can. He isnt that fast, cant beat a man, is poor defensively and poor under the high ball. How some can still say he is better than Roberts in that position is beyond me. The main argument seems to be that he is good at chiming into the line but Roberts does this better anyway. Indeed if you put any half back at Full Back they could do what Phelps does and I would guarantee that players like S Tomkins, McGuire, Horne, Pryce or Eastmond would do it better.

I also struggle to understand this utility tag that Phelps has got. He may have been tried in many positions but how many has he actually been good in? He was poor at hooker (so much so that he hasnt been picked there since), poor at centre (again a position he hasnt been picked in again since his couple of games there) and was average at best on the wing. I think he has been tried in so many positions to justify his signing as much as anything else but that to me doesnt make him a good utility player.

As a quota player he should be one of our better players but he wouldnt even be in my first choice 17. I dont think that he can do anything that our young backup players cant do and these players should get the chance instead of keeping Phelps. He is also no doubt better payed than most of our youngsters and the money can be much better spent elsewhere, preferably on a top quality quota player or boosting the contracts of our younger players.

[OJ]

If you are looking for someone to get rid of Karl Price and Feka should be ahead of this lad in the queue every day of the week. Phelps didn't get awarded the coverted No 1 shirt for nothing and until the injury had been one of our stand out players and was actually heading for MOM in the game where he had to come off at half time. From when he first joined us he has been lively, interested and enthusiastic three words you could not have awarded to many of his team mates last year. Keep him for me 100% unless the management of the cap etc would result in us losing one of our promising youngsters as a result but seeing as we are not and never will be privvy to that info the discussion is just damaging to a good player.

But Cameron Phelps is a fullback so I don't understand what offloading Karl Pryce, a centre, and Feka Paleaasina, a prop, has to do with it.

Phelps got awarded the number one shirt because there was no other alternative. Richie Mathers was atrocious and Pat was more of a threat on the wing.

He isn't just a full back he is a utility player who started off playing on the wing if I recall correctly - all I was saying is that there are other players that I could live without before Cameron Phelps

[GeoffN]

An interesting aspect of the Phelps v Amos dilemma...

It's not really a Phelps v Amos debate, though. On current form, Richards, Carmont, Gleeson & Roberts must play, so it becomes a Phelps v Goulding debate.

In other words, when all 6 are fit, the choice is between a line up of:

1. Phelps
2. Roberts

and

1. Roberts
2. Goulding


IMO, we're stronger with the second, but that's when all 6 are fit. Bring in just one injury and Phelps becomes more valuable than Goulding for his versatility.

Ideally, I'd like to keep both, as I've said, but if it came to a straight choice between the two, I'd prefer Goulding.