Page 2 of 3

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:43 am
by MrDave
Indifferent

(The Gleeson signing has people thinking it might change Wigan's season around and will probably sell a few more tickets for Wigan v Saints but after Wigan get destroyed on Thursday and Gleeson novelty weres off it will make no difference to the season at all.)

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:15 am
by ashtonned
Bad as I think that the money could have been much better spent elsewhere. I dont think he will make any difference at all as we dont have the pack to lay the foundations or the half backs to create anything.

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:00 am
by ajsefc
Tremendous

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:49 am
by ian.birchall
Old

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:01 am
by Riversiders RLC
Its not only good, but an excellent signing.

Can you remember the last time Wigan had 2 attacking centres, not since renouf and connelly IIRC.

Richards
Roberts
Gleeson
Carmont
Ainscough

Looks a lot better than it did this time last week.

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:13 pm
by shawcross da warrior
great.

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:48 pm
by GeoffN
ashtonned wrote:Bad as I think that the money could have been much better spent elsewhere. I dont think he will make any difference at all as we dont have the pack to lay the foundations or the half backs to create anything.
But you can only spend it on who's available. Can you think of any other club that would be prepared to sell an international player and take Mathers off our hands in part-ex?


Good.


Good enough? Probably not, but it's another step in the right direction, IMO.

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:50 pm
by ashtonned
GeoffN wrote:But you can only spend it on who's available.
That is exactly the same argument that people used when the club signed Phelps, Pryce, Mathers etc. It hardly smacks of forward planning and building a team. You prioritise what the team needs and the money could have been far better spent elsewhere. Instead the club have spent a fair chunk of the cap on a luxury player who isnt going to make a real difference to the team.

This just seems like a short term signing out of desperation just to try and keep the fans happy. Gleeson is often very average and Warrington fans have complained for years about this. Indeed a better, or at least comparable centre, could have been signed for less money come the end of the season.

From what I have been told Gleeson wasnt available until Warrington tried to sign Goulding. If the club was prepared to spend £125,000 on Gleeson they would have easily been able to sign 2 quality forwards for that.
GeoffN wrote:Can you think of any other club that would be prepared to sell an international player
Many clubs will sell if the price is right. This has always been the case and in this day and age it is even more so.
GeoffN wrote: and take Mathers off our hands in part-ex?
Warrington did. They werent forced into signing him. There will always be clubs that will sign players like Mathers. If it wasnt Warrington the like of Salford, Celtic and Wakefield would.

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:56 pm
by mike binder
tell u friday

Re: Gleeson in one word: Good or bad signing?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:11 pm
by Lil Feka's Dad
Bad.

Never understood the hype, and a totally overrated player IMO.