Wigan in talks to keep Green

[cpwigan]

The role of a position changes over time. The NRL may prove to be the best learning curve Sam has ever had.

[Panchitta Marra]

If Tomkins does overcome his his frailties shown at Wigan which was inconsistent catching of a high ball is it not a reflection on WWRLFC not training him sufficiently how to successfully do this in the first place and instead just concentrating on his attacking skills. With Rads in place surely it would be a no brainer for any reasonable full back to be half decent at catching the ball under his guidance.

[Wigan_forever1985]

The whole Sam at fb was a McGuire invention the aim of which being to put your most potent broken field/ attacking runner at the back it wasn't because he thought he was a natural fb. That's why inglis plays there for souths fortunately Sam was freakishly good in attack so it papered over his catching and positional faults. Inglis is a freak and can play anywhere on a rugby pitch and best one of the best in the world there.

For me if a bloke is a stand off play him at stand off, I've never been a fan of playing people out of position. It doesn't work in the main unless they are an exceptional player ala inglis. Look at Richards playing at centre and how much more player you got out of him on the wing.

All that will happen is catching and defence will let a stand off in the fb role down. In turn that will effect the confidence of that player

[sheepsteeth]

Just because Sam used to play 6 or 7 doesn't mean he's played out of position at FB. Maybe that was his best position all along.

Wasn't James Roby originally a half back? I don't think he's been played out of position all these years.

I do however think that if hampshire is as good as all the more informed people on here say as a 6 then keeping Green could be a Tim Smith situation again.

[Wigan_forever1985]

I think it depends on the player and they're age and other factors. I agree somewhat in the sense people can change positions and find better positions for their abilities. However I believe to this day Sam was at his best at 6. I think rocky is also a 6 and that's where he will be best played.

Hooker and half back are closer skill sets IMO than half back and full back. Full back is a specialist position and for me despite the change in the nature of a full back it is still that.

Lomas is a good example he is 20% better when he is played at fullback than half back. Likewise hardaker is a much more natural full back.

[cpwigan]

Shaun Edwards gained his early experience and a CC winners medal at FB, Frano Botica played on the win for a few seasons before movint to half back, Ellery Hanley played loose forward after signing as a stand off. You could go on and on.

The game changes and the coaches adapt as they see fit. Hanpo / Rads etc none could play FB as required today. Neither could George Fairbairn / Mick Burke / Keith Mumby but every one could catch the odd bomb so I guess that makes them FBs.

Long before Britain got its gead around what a FB actually was; Jack Gibson played Peter Sterling at FB and moved the so called FB Taylor into the front line to tackle like a madman snapping at the ankles of much bigger men. Oh wait we no longer tackle low either.

Times change / tactics change and yes players can switch positions.

[Wigan_forever1985]

I agree cp players can however most players have a "natural" or preferred position where they perform better because their skill sets lend themselves to that role the most. For me no matter what the modern day fullback is, the ability to catch under pressure will always be a need. Madge changed the conception of a fb in the esl but it doesn't mean you can lob anyone there and they will be great.

Really good players can play in various positions well. This obsession with putting half backs at full back just because to me is not something I agree with. I think you have to give players chance to play where they are best.

[devon jim 1]

Shaun Edwards gained his early experience and a CC winners medal at FB, Frano Botica played on the win for a few seasons before movint to half back, Ellery Hanley played loose forward after signing as a stand off. You could go on and on.

The game changes and the coaches adapt as they see fit. Hanpo / Rads etc none could play FB as required today. Neither could George Fairbairn / Mick Burke / Keith Mumby but every one could catch the odd bomb so I guess that makes them FBs.

Long before Britain got its gead around what a FB actually was; Jack Gibson played Peter Sterling at FB and moved the so called FB Taylor into the front line to tackle like a madman snapping at the ankles of much bigger men. Oh wait we no longer tackle low either.

Times change / tactics change and yes players can switch positions.

It's not often I would disagree with you CP. But to say George Fairburn, Mick Burke, Hampo or Rads couldn't play the required way for a modern day full back is disrespectful to these suberb players. Okay thet played in a different era but they fulfilled what was required of them then, and I will speculate as you have done, that they had the skills and nous to do so if they played today. don't forget that Fairburn carried our team in a similar manner,albeit a different position , to Farrell,before being transfered to Hull KR for a record british fee.

[cpwigan]

Shaun Edwards gained his early experience and a CC winners medal at FB, Frano Botica played on the win for a few seasons before movint to half back, Ellery Hanley played loose forward after signing as a stand off. You could go on and on.

The game changes and the coaches adapt as they see fit. Hanpo / Rads etc none could play FB as required today. Neither could George Fairbairn / Mick Burke / Keith Mumby but every one could catch the odd bomb so I guess that makes them FBs.

Long before Britain got its gead around what a FB actually was; Jack Gibson played Peter Sterling at FB and moved the so called FB Taylor into the front line to tackle like a madman snapping at the ankles of much bigger men. Oh wait we no longer tackle low either.

Times change / tactics change and yes players can switch positions.

It's not often I would disagree with you CP. But to say George Fairburn, Mick Burke, Hampo or Rads couldn't play the required way for a modern day full back is disrespectful to these suberb players. Okay thet played in a different era but they fulfilled what was required of them then, and I will speculate as you have done, that they had the skills and nous to do so if they played today. don't forget that Fairburn carried our team in a similar manner,albeit a different position , to Farrell,before being transfered to Hull KR for a record british fee.

Great players / fantastic FBs in their era Jim but in todays era they could not play as the third half back that the FB position has now evolved into. People talk about Madge and the stand off position etc but Jack Gibson would play Steve Ella at full back in the very early 80's. He described it as the bonus position.

[wiggydoran]

Could the green deal depend on the plans for Marty smith? I don't know what his contract is length etc but if he is not retained then there is the gap for Sam Powell or George Williams.