Whelans interview at half time!

[Donald_Bumsfelt]

Bravo Mr Whelan for coming out & voicing what TRUE Rugby League supporters everywhere have been saying all season.

One club is not bigger than the game & if we finish bottom we should go down.

Interesting to see he left in the bit about if the superleague decide to do something it would be nothing to do with Wigan though.....get out clause perhaps? I hope not as the I thought he came across superbly as a man of honesty & integrity who would be left with egg on his face should we escape by matters decided off the sporting field.

[Nine]

It was an excellent interview and made it very clear to anyone with a brain that we will battle our way out of this on the pitch - either to stay up this year or come back after relegation - and by no other means.

For those who didn't see it here is a piece from the PA based on what Whelan (and Lewis) have said about the story in the News of the Screws.

Wigan owner Dave Whelan insists his side will fight their way back to engage Super League if they are relegated this season - rather than paying for a promoted team to stay down.

Reports suggested Whelan would offer a deal for the promoted side to remain in LHF Healthplan National League One and for Wigan to take their place, but Warriors owner Whelan denies setting up such a deal.

Wigan are currently bottom of the table in Super League but could yet retain their top-flight status, even if they relegated, should officials decide to expand the league.

"I cannot believe anybody would have the audacity to accuse me or Wigan of touching those depths," said Whelan.

"If Leigh come up they will deserve to come up, if we go down we will deserve to go down.

"Whatever the league do, and I've heard rumours they may introduce another team, that has nothing to do with Wigan. We've been down before and we've been back, if we go down this year we'll accept it but we'll fight like hell to get back."

Whelan insists the league will cope if Wigan are relegated, adding on Sky Sports: "The Super League will survive without Wigan, St Helens or anyone, this is a great league and they will survive without one rugby league team.

"We aim to stay in this league but, whatever happens, we will not stoop to pay Leigh or Hull KR, who have fought to get what they deserve."

RFL executive chairman Richard Lewis said: "It is wild rumour and speculation as far as I am concerned. The RFL would not be supportive of any such move, that's very clear. Rules are rules.

"It's the same situation as last year when the same thing came up with London Broncos."

[Stev0]

robjoenz posted:

jolleymax posted:
lockers was non existant as the captain as ususal.

Who told you that rubbish? He tackled his heart out tonight and carried the ball well going forward. Whilst he may not be the most vocal of captains, as has been discussed many times before, he certainly leads by example.

That's nonsense Robbo, he may have done all those things you say but he did not play a Captains role.

[Stev0]

DaveO posted:

robjoenz posted:

jolleymax posted:
lockers was non existant as the captain as ususal.

Who told you that rubbish? He tackled his heart out tonight and carried the ball well going forward. Whilst he may not be the most vocal of captains, as has been discussed many times before, he certainly leads by example.

And has been said often enough "leading by example" is an apology from him not saying a dicky bird on the pitch.

He certainly did set an example tonight but it would be better if he ralied the troops as well. It isn't too much to ask from a captain.

He is playing as a player, not a captain.

Dave

Spot on Dave0, pity i didn't read this before posting earlier, i could have saved myself some ink.

lockers had a good game he and fretcher seem to be given orders out all night ,but we only have 1 leader and that as to be danny orr

He is probably the best choice out of a bad bunch.I don't want to start another raging debate but IF Terry was to return, he would be my man for the job, and before someone says he's too hot-headed etc. maybe the captaincy would steady him down in that department... Flame on!

[stevocod]

robjoenz posted:

jolleymax posted:
lockers was non existant as the captain as ususal.

Who told you that rubbish? He tackled his heart out tonight and carried the ball well going forward. Whilst he may not be the most vocal of captains, as has been discussed many times before, he certainly leads by example.

Hmm heart or head?

[DaveO]

I have to say the quote from Lewis about "rules are rules" is hypocritical in my view.

If "rules are rules" how come Henry Paul and one or two other players got to play in the challenge cup when they had missed the signing deadline?

Rules are only rules in this sport until someone wants to change them.

Dave

[Fraggle]

Stev0 posted:

DaveO posted:

lockers had a good game he and fretcher seem to be given orders out all night ,but we only have 1 leader and that as to be danny orr

He is probably the best choice out of a bad bunch.I don't want to start another raging debate but IF Terry was to return, he would be my man for the job, and before someone says he's too hot-headed etc. maybe the captaincy would steady him down in that department... Flame on!

No flames, but a request that you cast your mind back 12 months. When Rads was captain, his game dropped and we looked pretty clueless. Many people blamed Betts at the time, but with hindsight perhaps he wasn't totally to blame for our lack of direction (and wrt Rads I think the problem was that it is difficult to be captain from fullback, rather than any lack of ability on Kris' part).

Then, when Rads got injured, Newton took over the armband, and for the rest of the season (at least until the Stains game) he became pretty much anonymous. Certainly not the player we had seen in the past, it was almost as if he couldn't manage to be both a good player and a captain, which is possibly what is happening with Lockers now. From the evidence of last season, I'm sorry but Newton's no more a captain than I am.

The club should not hesitate to offer the armband to Fletcher. I said he should have had the job when he arrived, although I know he said he didn't want it. But he's not been particularly special as a player since he came, so his form couldn't suffer too much, whilst we know that Lockers is capable of a lot more than he has been showing, and perhaps he can regain that if he doesn't have the added pressure of being captain. He's still young, his time can come again, but getting out of our current plight should be the overriding concern of the entire club and if that means hard decisions being made and people possibly being upset then so be it.

[mike binder]

give it to fletch cant make is game any worse ,it maybe the making of him and lockers :conf:

[Wigan Watcher]

Flash posted:

That's nonsense Robbo, he may have done all those things you say but he did not play a Captains role.

I would like to correct this, if I may, and say 'he didn't play your idea of a captain's role. There is a difference. As I posted elsewhere, he made 30+ tackles, took the ball up as well as anyone, made several line breaks and put a couple of good kicks in. What you mean is he didn't shout his mouth off.

I'll move this away from rugby for a moment in order to make a point. There are several different kinds of leader. The ranters and ravers (Hitler), those who give Churchillian speeches (well, er..Churchill!), Those who lead by example (Ghandi, Nelson Mandela) and those who use a combination of the above (Martin Luther King, Kennedy). This board could argue for all eternity which is the 'best' type without ever coming to a conclusion, because the simple fact is all of them can be successful. Was Roy Keane (ranter) a better captain than Bobby Moore (led by example) for instance? Certainly at club level he was, but then Bobby Moore was a world cup winning captain. You decide. The fact remains that both these captains played in teams that didn't do so well, and were unable to make much difference. Did that then make them bad captains?

Bringing it back to rugby and our own team, different fans want to see different things from a captain. Some are only happy if he seems to be shouting all the time, others are happier to see commitment to the cause in terms of effort and workrate. Players also want different things from a captain. I have nothing but my own obsevations to back this up, but I would think that the likes of Fletcher, Orr, Logan, Feka, Hock wouldn't respond to someone giving them an ear bashing wheras other players perhaps would.

For my own part, I prefer a captain that combines the Churchillian with the lead by example approach (Hanley comes to mind), but I am equally willing to accept that that is just my opinion. The other approaches have been just as successful across many different sports. I do think it's true, however, that O'loughlin's captaincy 'style' would not be coming into question if we were trouncing all before us. The question we should be asking is whether it his his style, or poor performances from the team as a whole, that is responsible for us being where we are. I know which one I feel is responsible.

A quick question: Where do you get that he made 30+ tackles?

[DaveO]

Flash posted:
I would like to correct this, if I may, and say 'he didn't play your idea of a captain's role. There is a difference. As I posted elsewhere, he made 30+ tackles, took the ball up as well as anyone, made several line breaks and put a couple of good kicks in. What you mean is he didn't shout his mouth off.

What he didn't do was organise the team the best example being the commitee meeting requied to decide to take a shot a goal for a penalty.

Bringing it back to rugby and our own team, different fans want to see different things from a captain. Some are only happy if he seems to be shouting all the time, others are happier to see commitment to the cause in terms of effort and workrate. Players also want different things from a captain. I have nothing but my own obsevations to back this up, but I would think that the likes of Fletcher, Orr, Logan, Feka, Hock wouldn't respond to someone giving them an ear bashing wheras other players perhaps would.

They probably would not respond to a young player like Lockers giving them an ear bashing which is a big reason why he was not the right choice in the first place. You have to earn the respect of players senior to yourself in order to be able to order them around never mind dish out an ear bashing and Lockers simply has not got the experience to command such respect.

That was one reason why it was a mistake by Millward to give the captaincy to Lockers but Noble is stuck between a rock and a hard place in deciding whether to leave him with the job.

On several occaisions last night it was Fletcher who queried the refs decisions so just who is our captain?

For my own part, I prefer a captain that combines the Churchillian with the lead by example approach (Hanley comes to mind), but I am equally willing to accept that that is just my opinion.

I think you will find everyine does and that the critism of Lockers is he only has the "lead by example" part sussed out.

The other approaches have been just as successful across many different sports. I do think it's true, however, that O'loughlin's captaincy 'style' would not be coming into question if we were trouncing all before us.

If we were trouncing all before us those players not delivering the goods on the pitch would not need chastising or encouraging to do better would they?

So it stands to reason we would not be complaining about his style.

The team has been crying out for direct leadership all season given the situation we are in. If it was winning every week then it seems obvious Lockers would need to say very little.

The question we should be asking is whether it his his style, or poor performances from the team as a whole, that is responsible for us being where we are. I know which one I feel is responsible.

Of course its the teams poor performaance but that is no excuse for him to not try and get them to perform better or organising the team.

Noble said in his post match interviee "Radlinski's comments helped me at half time" or words to that effect.

What with Fletcher talking to the ref and Rads doing the half time team talk its about time people accepted Lockers is not playing a captains role.

Dave