Tonight's game v Wakefield

[Charriots Offiah]

Yes but there is not a 100% kicker in SL so you can't rely in kicking goals.

Apart from Wakefield’s tonight you mean? 100% success from their kicker, 60% from ours and we lose.

But he isn't always a 100% kicker so my point is still valid.

Focus on this kicker all you want and I agree we need a better goal kicker but our defence is up and down and that's the issue. We let Wakefield score 4 tries. Other teams have put 30 past us as well.

Defence wins trophies and ours isn't good enough.

It is but not often enough.

[Caboosegg]

For the record I am not saying all of them are bad signings, it just feels like we take lots of risk, lots of project players and create some of the issues ourselves.

Overall our recruitment hasn’t been up to it as we have an imbalanced squad, an ever changing spine and some serious gaps.

On the Bateman point - we didn’t have to let him go… I appreciate he may not have wanted to stay but we then chose to not replace him…

I think our hands were tied with him. If a player wants to leave and a good offer is there, you can't really say no. If we held on for another season, he had a shit season and we ended with no money for him that would be a lot worse. Also he left it very late to decide he was off so we didn't have time to get the right player in. I'm expecting a few more signings before next season

As I have said several times the way the club handled the Bateman exit was farcical and inept. Fair enough if a player wants to leave and the perceived wisdom is you shouldn’t keep a player who wants out you should mange it better than how Wigan managed Bateman’s exit. They literally danced to his and his agents tune and to cut a long story short by the time the club actually agreed to let him go there was no chance of signing anyone else which would have be non quota player anyway because the quota was full.

The criticism of the recruitment at Wigan isn’t just who we sign or retain but the amateurish way it’s handled. Even Cooper and King fell into our lap, offered to us by Warrington. We didn’t prize them from their sticky palms.

King and Cooper fell on our laps?

In what way? We went after Cooper and the only luck part was getting him early.

We also went for King as did Huddersfield

Would you say hardaker fell into Leighs lap?

[EagleEyePie]

Got a point there they seem to have painted themselves into a corner with Miski,good player for sure but as good as French flying down the wing? As good as Marshall pinning his ears back and pumping those little legs of his? I'm not so sure,yes he's improving all the time but Wigan's success last year had those 2 on the wing with Field creating merry hell when he had the chance.

The problem is we don't have Field creating merry hell this season. We don't have Smith on the right edge either, so while Miski isn't as good as French flying down the wing how are we going to get French flying down the wing when the person in the team most capable of producing the passes to get French flying down the wing is French himself?

French has scored 4 tries while playing wing this year. 2 against Catalans, 1 against Huddersfield and 1 against Salford. (His other 2 tries in the Hudds and Salford games were when he was at fullback). He also had 3 games without scoring in the 6 games he's started on the wing this year.

Miski has 10 tries in 12 games on the wing. It's not like we're massively lacking a threat on the wing and he's scored some very impressive tries this year. One of the reasons he's scoring tries is because of the creativity of French, whether than be at fullback or at stand off. French averages an assist per game at stand off and a try every 2 games.

Field's form was noticeably weaker even at the start of this year and that's one of the reasons why French wasn't scoring for fun early in the year and why the general consensus was he needed to be starting at fullback rather than playing there for part of a game. Field to 6 was also the call because the team attacked much better whenever Field was at 6 and French at 1. I think people forget that Field played 6 quite a few times before his nightmare against Catalans, he just hadn't started many games there.

If I had to be a bit critical of Matt Peet I think he got spooked by the Catalans game. Every time Field played 6 prior to that he had looked okay and his defence had been surprisingly good considering his size and build. One nightmare game after returning from injury and Field at 6 becomes something to avoid at all costs. But it was our weak pack that allowed our edges to be targeted that was the biggest problem. The following week we played Saints and they attack more down their right edge and it was Smith who looked a shambles. Smith isn't a terrible defender, the team just allowed him to be picked out.

Basically, French is our most creative player right now and I don't see how we benefit from moving him into a position where he can't create anything. We'll just be removing a threat from a playmaking position and not sufficiently replacing it.

I agree that French is not a stand off but this is probably the weirdest statement I have heard in a long time!

The stand off role being a position where nothing is created!

I was arguing against people saying French should be moved to the wing (where he can't create anything). All the arguments above are about why French is creating when at stand off or fullback and should be in one of those positions rather than out wide.

I probably should have clarified I was talking about him being on the wing in that last paragraph as I'd jumped to a different point in the previous one.

[Charriots Offiah]

Much as I like Minski he is our 3rd choice winger and giving him the extra year and singing his praises to high heaven Peet has made a rod for his own back and feels he has to play him to save face. Field at full back French on the wing and Cust or Rocky at 6 is the way to go for me . We have signed Thornley three times and I'm still waiting for a decent return from him .

EW

Got a point there they seem to have painted themselves into a corner with Miski,good player for sure but as good as French flying down the wing? As good as Marshall pinning his ears back and pumping those little legs of his? I'm not so sure,yes he's improving all the time but Wigan's success last year had those 2 on the wing with Field creating merry hell when he had the chance.

The problem is we don't have Field creating merry hell this season. We don't have Smith on the right edge either, so while Miski isn't as good as French flying down the wing how are we going to get French flying down the wing when the person in the team most capable of producing the passes to get French flying down the wing is French himself?

French has scored 4 tries while playing wing this year. 2 against Catalans, 1 against Huddersfield and 1 against Salford. (His other 2 tries in the Hudds and Salford games were when he was at fullback). He also had 3 games without scoring in the 6 games he's started on the wing this year.

Miski has 10 tries in 12 games on the wing. It's not like we're massively lacking a threat on the wing and he's scored some very impressive tries this year. One of the reasons he's scoring tries is because of the creativity of French, whether than be at fullback or at stand off. French averages an assist per game at stand off and a try every 2 games.

Field's form was noticeably weaker even at the start of this year and that's one of the reasons why French wasn't scoring for fun early in the year and why the general consensus was he needed to be starting at fullback rather than playing there for part of a game. Field to 6 was also the call because the team attacked much better whenever Field was at 6 and French at 1. I think people forget that Field played 6 quite a few times before his nightmare against Catalans, he just hadn't started many games there.

If I had to be a bit critical of Matt Peet I think he got spooked by the Catalans game. Every time Field played 6 prior to that he had looked okay and his defence had been surprisingly good considering his size and build. One nightmare game after returning from injury and Field at 6 becomes something to avoid at all costs. But it was our weak pack that allowed our edges to be targeted that was the biggest problem. The following week we played Saints and they attack more down their right edge and it was Smith who looked a shambles. Smith isn't a terrible defender, the team just allowed him to be picked out.

Basically, French is our most creative player right now and I don't see how we benefit from moving him into a position where he can't create anything. We'll just be removing a threat from a playmaking position and not sufficiently replacing it.

Just one point. Smith is a left hander and French right so we need to swop them to make their passing game easier.

[Charriots Offiah]

Let's be honest we're not very good are we. simple as that ,years of poor recruitment comes home to roost when leigh have a better spine after one year than we do.

Agreed - too many poor signings and relying on youth who aren’t up to it.

Was Cust a good idea to pair with Smith given both their ages and experience?

Was the Ellis and Mago signings the right pair of props given our youth and lack of grunt in that area?

Was Hampshire the right utility signing? Was Thornley?

Unsure on timing but as you can’t align everything but we’ve lost Bateman, McDonnel, Nicholson and soon KPP all at second row.

It seems we’ve signed too many project players, utility players at the same time and things haven’t worked out.

Credit where it’s due on the Wardle and King loan though.

It just feels we’ve got a lot more wrong than right these last few years.

Similarly next year - we’ve signed Leeming who I am fine with but Chan and Walters are both young which doesn’t help us address our problems at prop or even second row if that’s were Walters is playing

Our recruitment is not finished yet.

[Flash]

Most seem to be trying to put the loss down to a single issue; say "missed kicks", "discipline" or the "French/Field conundrum", maybe even "recruitment" when, in truth, it's a combination of all these things.

The overriding thought from last night is that if I'd told you we were going into a game with Singleton, Mago and Byrne as our only props, who would have expected a win? I certainly wouldn't! We were already without Cooper and Ellis and lost Havard after 6 minutes. Take Walmsley, Paasi and Lees out if the Saints pack and they probably lose too. Add Batchelor, Percival and a couple others and they definitely do!

I'm as angry and disappointed as anyone else at losing to the bottom placed side but were a stupid penalty away from winning that match. Things to address, certainly. But one individual problem was not the reason.

[Charriots Offiah]

The problem is we don't have Field creating merry hell this season. We don't have Smith on the right edge either, so while Miski isn't as good as French flying down the wing how are we going to get French flying down the wing when the person in the team most capable of producing the passes to get French flying down the wing is French himself?

French has scored 4 tries while playing wing this year. 2 against Catalans, 1 against Huddersfield and 1 against Salford. (His other 2 tries in the Hudds and Salford games were when he was at fullback). He also had 3 games without scoring in the 6 games he's started on the wing this year.

Miski has 10 tries in 12 games on the wing. It's not like we're massively lacking a threat on the wing and he's scored some very impressive tries this year. One of the reasons he's scoring tries is because of the creativity of French, whether than be at fullback or at stand off. French averages an assist per game at stand off and a try every 2 games.

Field's form was noticeably weaker even at the start of this year and that's one of the reasons why French wasn't scoring for fun early in the year and why the general consensus was he needed to be starting at fullback rather than playing there for part of a game. Field to 6 was also the call because the team attacked much better whenever Field was at 6 and French at 1. I think people forget that Field played 6 quite a few times before his nightmare against Catalans, he just hadn't started many games there.

If I had to be a bit critical of Matt Peet I think he got spooked by the Catalans game. Every time Field played 6 prior to that he had looked okay and his defence had been surprisingly good considering his size and build. One nightmare game after returning from injury and Field at 6 becomes something to avoid at all costs. But it was our weak pack that allowed our edges to be targeted that was the biggest problem. The following week we played Saints and they attack more down their right edge and it was Smith who looked a shambles. Smith isn't a terrible defender, the team just allowed him to be picked out.

Basically, French is our most creative player right now and I don't see how we benefit from moving him into a position where he can't create anything. We'll just be removing a threat from a playmaking position and not sufficiently replacing it.

I agree that French is not a stand off but this is probably the weirdest statement I have heard in a long time!

The stand off role being a position where nothing is created!

The point being made (I think) isn't that the position is where nothing is created but where French doesn't create much because he isn't suited to the position. That's probably where I stand on it as well. The problem at the moment is we don't actually have another stand off. Peet blatantly doesn't trust Cust to play stand off and wants French and Field in the team

Just get French to run the ball which is his best attribute.

[Charriots Offiah]

Let's be honest we're not very good are we. simple as that ,years of poor recruitment comes home to roost when leigh have a better spine after one year than we do.

Agreed - too many poor signings and relying on youth who aren’t up to it.

Was Cust a good idea to pair with Smith given both their ages and experience?

Was the Ellis and Mago signings the right pair of props given our youth and lack of grunt in that area?

Was Hampshire the right utility signing? Was Thornley?

Unsure on timing but as you can’t align everything but we’ve lost Bateman, McDonnel, Nicholson and soon KPP all at second row.

It seems we’ve signed too many project players, utility players at the same time and things haven’t worked out.

Credit where it’s due on the Wardle and King loan though.

It just feels we’ve got a lot more wrong than right these last few years.

Similarly next year - we’ve signed Leeming who I am fine with but Chan and Walters are both young which doesn’t help us address our problems at prop or even second row if that’s were Walters is playing

Was Cust a good signing... initially yeah he's gone backwards since his injury.

Ellis... I fail to see the issue he's been solid and a good overall signing.

Mago he's not done as well as expected but you can see why we signed him initially he causes All sorts of problems for the opposition when he plays but we haven't managed to have it consistently or for long periods.

Hampshire made sense to provide cover across multiple positions. He's a proven SL player and having a utility back of that quality is good planning.

Bateman, McDonnel, Nicholson and soon KPP. You can hardly blame the club for this. Bateman screwed us McDonnel and Nicholson wanted a guaranteed starting spot (last time we did this was our props and everyone complained) and we did give KPP a starting spot and he used it to jump ship to the NRL.

But I suppose people see what they want to affirm their view (I include myself in this I don't think I know better than everyone else)

We need to be better at extending junior players contracts. If Nicholson and McDonnell were seen as the future then the club should not have allowed their contracts to run down.

[Suzieb]

Another bad coaching move was leaving Hill as 18th man and playing Mago

[Charriots Offiah]

Apart from Wakefield’s tonight you mean? 100% success from their kicker, 60% from ours and we lose.

But he isn't always a 100% kicker so my point is still valid.

Focus on this kicker all you want and I agree we need a better goal kicker but our defence is up and down and that's the issue. We let Wakefield score 4 tries. Other teams have put 30 past us as well.

Defence wins trophies and ours isn't good enough.

I don’t disagree on defence but few teams are successful where half their tries only count for four points. Smith can kick difficult goals but he misses sitters and I am going to hazard a guess he looked much like he did lining up kicks v HKR when we played there which is like a rabbit caught in the headlights.

When we are away from the DW he looks nervous and it’s about time the coaching staff got to grips with this issue. It’s not use anyone asking anyone on here “who else” as if that excuses them from dealing with this because that’s not our job nor are we able to decide the best way forward such as kicking coaches or whatever. The trouble is the coaching staff seem to be ignoring the issue.

The coaching staff are not capable of resolving the problem. The reason for Smiths success last season was Briers. We need a kicking coach because, based on his success rate last year, Smith is a decent kicker.