If we go down which players will stay?

[DaveO]

If the worst happens and we get relegated, does anyone think any of the decent players we have will stay with the club on the reduced wages of an NL1 side in order to get us back up at the first attempt?

All contracts get ripped up for the relegated side and despite collectively being a poor side this season there are quite a few players who would find it easy to get a place in another SL side.

The question is would they feel any obligation to stay and help is out?

If Barrett honours his promise and still comes that means Fletcher would have to leave (Baily won't come and you are only allowed one overaeas player in NL1).

Of the others I am sure Lockers, Feka, Higham, Godwin, Calders, Logan, Hock, Tickle and Richards would get contacts elsewhere especially as the overseas players mentioned don't count on the quota.

Even Ashton, Goulding and Hansen could be offered places in other sides.

Our squad could be unrecognisable in NL1.

I'd like to think several of the above list would stick by the club partly because they owe us some effort to get us out of it but also because they realise if they get us out of NL1 at the first attempt their wages go back up.

The game is their livlihood however so I have my doubts any of them would do so.

I think two players in particular owe the club some loyalty. Lockers and Hock, Hock in particular.

He would not have a SL career if the club had not stuck by him throughout his long injury. He has taken a 20/20 slot up for half a season which meant we could not recrute a first grade replacement to the team for 14 games.

If he (and Lockers) stick by the club if we go dowm that would be great. If not, well the message to the club is clear:- don't stick by long term injured players. Ship them out asap and get a fit replacement in.

So who do people think will stick by us? Anyone or no one?

Dave

[Wigan Watcher]

No if about it, we are down and out. I always say I hope I’m wrong but if we think this young 19 yr old is going to change things then we are kidding ourselves, don’t get me wrong I think he is a good kid and I’m glad we have got him.

There is a full team of player not doing it and not good enough. O’Loughlin is simply an good player who is no captain, I could go on and on but what’s the point .

LETS DREAM

[DaveO]

Wigan Watcher posted:
No if about it, we are down and out. I always say I hope I’m wrong but if we think this young 19 yr old is going to change things then we are kidding ourselves, don’t get me wrong I think he is a good kid and I’m glad we have got him.

There is a full team of player not doing it and not good enough. O’Loughlin is simply an good player who is no captain, I could go on and on but what’s the point .

I wasn't asking about how good the players were at the moment but whether people thought any of them would or should stick by the club in NL1?

The club has been loyal to several players, will they be loyal to the club or was the clubs loyalty misplaced?

I suppose the glib answer is that if we go down we should get rid of the lot because they are not good enough but if anyone really thinks we will be competitive in NL1 with no team they are in for a surprise.

Dave

[Martin WWRFL]

hardly any players would stay.

n even though he said he would i cant see trent barrett playin in NL1

[the_cow]

i too would like to think that hock and lockers would stay after we stuck by them through theyre long-term injuries.

hock was out for a very long time and i dont think some of the more cut-throat rl teams would have waited to see if he was ever going to play again. it had crossed my mind to cancel his contract earlier this season when rumours had it he wasnt going to play this season- however these were put to bed on fri at salford when i think he had a very good game considering how long he was out for. lockers has still to recapture the form he showed before his injury last season and im not sure many teams would pay what we'll be paying him at present on his current form.

i feel they owe us something more than most of the others do and if hock abandoned ship i would hope his injury reoccured keeping him out for good- harsh but honest.

[oldtimer]

why should the players show loyalty?the club only shows it when it suits them.the latest case moram=he was signed on a contract,okay he did not do it,but he still had a contract,if your face didnt fit at work, would you expect to be fired at the drop of a hat?

[DaveO]

the_cow posted:
hock was out for a very long time and i dont think some of the more cut-throat rl teams would have waited to see if he was ever going to play again. it had crossed my mind to cancel his contract earlier this season when rumours had it he wasnt going to play this season

Perhaps if the club had known at the start of the season how long he was gong to be out for they would have and maybe should have cancelled his contract.

Because of the long term injuries to Hock, Radders and Fletcher we started the season with at most 17 players of first grade stabndard i.e. on more then £20K a year. In fact I think most people thought we had not filled out 20/20 completely at the start of the season so that would mean trying to go with 16 players of adiquate standard from the off.

That was never going to work so with hindsight it makes you wonder if the club would have cut Hock adrift had they known he long he was going to be out for so they could add another first grade player to the squad who we would have had for the last 14 games.

Because his injury the time frame for his return was always changing so I can see why they club would have originally expected him back sooner but I can't help thinking an extra senior player for the last 14 games would have helped a lot.

So I reckon Mr. Hock owes the club at least a season in NL1 if the worst comes to the worst.

Dave

[turf]

I know which players will stay if we go down, and the answer is - none of them.

I mean look at it, we've got the likes of Ashton, Godwin, Tickle and Hock. Do you lot seriously think that the mentioned players will stay with Wigan should we go down??? I don't think so.

[Doveoverdave]

Dave O posted:
If the worst happens and we get relegated, does anyone think any of the decent players we have will stay with the club on the reduced wages of an NL1 side in order to get us back up at the first attempt?

Straight and simple NO!

The question is would they feel any obligation to stay and help is out?

Sorry for reapeating myself.

They've been paid to do a job and in all honesty they will feel that they have kept to their side of the deal.

Our squad could be unrecognisable in NL1.

Correct!
Absolutely unrecognisable and if promoted first time ditto for the season after next.

Hock in particular.

He would not have a SL career if the club had not stuck by him throughout his long injury. He has taken a 20/20 slot up for half a season which meant we could not recrute a first grade replacement to the team for 14 games.

Tough decisions have not been made over the years and this may have been one of them. Terry Newton wasn't worth waiting for with a 10 game suspension yet we have been waiting nearly 2 seasons for Hock, who is still only a potentially good player unlike TN who is a current GB international.

If he (and Lockers) stick by the club if we go dowm that would be great. If not, well the message to the club is clear:- don't stick by long term injured players. Ship them out asap and get a fit replacement in.

Again tough decisions need to be made about players (and fans favuorite players) and the club has palpably failed in this area.

So who do people think will stick by us? Anyone or no one?

No-one and I wouldn't expect them to.

[DaveO]

oldtimer posted:
why should the players show loyalty?the club only shows it when it suits them.the latest case moram=he was signed on a contract,okay he did not do it,but he still had a contract,if your face didnt fit at work, would you expect to be fired at the drop of a hat?

Moran had his contract paid up so the club met its side of the bargain in full.

The club has showed loyalty to players.

It showed loyalty to Farrell in not standing in his way when he had two years of his deal to run.

People argued that was the right thing to do due to his long service for the club.

It has showed loyalty to Hock in keeping him on its books taking up a 20/20 slot while he has been out injured for most of last and this season. Lockers as well and even Radlinski was being given time to recover.

It is clear the club has been loyal to quite a few players who have either taken spots up on the 20/20 for months never mind weeks out injured or who have wanted to leave (Farrell).

If players like Hock all leave if we go down it will show that loylaty was misplaced.

It is OK people saying "its a pro sport playes need to earn money" but the club has clearly been generous in not being cut throat when it could have been.

Do you think we would be where we are if they had insisted Farrell honour his contract and had terminated Hocks contract at the end of least season allowing us to recruit another first grade player, both of whom would have been available for the last 14 games?

Dave