WiganWarriorsFans.com

He was so bad last year, the decision made sense. He has though been better over the last month than our hooking options. Happy for him, and can see that we might have made a mistake. If he had played last year like he played this year then I suppose we would have kept him.
As for next year, everything points to us having a new 7 to go alongside Williams (with Lachlan the favourite), so Tommy can play 9.

markill wrote:The move has obviously rejuvenated and reinvigorated him. Shame that we couldn't get that out of him, but pleased for him that the move has enabled him to get back there.

I think that quote would work for Lewis Tierney who needed the move and has done really well for himself but MM was (and still is) a big loss for us. Can anyone honestly say that we wouldn't be a better team if he was still playing for us?

Let's not forget Mickey showed some good form in the world cup as well. Form was more down to coaching/game plan than the player I think.

I'm not sure I agree with this re-writing history that we got rid of him because of poor performances. That didn't seem to happen at all to me, he was just coming back after injury and that looked to be going according to schedule. It was a bit of a shock that he went and no real explanation was given IMO.

Right now he's just playing as I would expect him to given his career up to this point, no better or worse than he did for us. He was always a top quality SL hooker and to get rid of him because TL was suddenly available for a season seemed like a weird decision then and it still does now. I'm sure more was going on behind the scenes when the decision was made.

Drinkwater was the key for me.Along with signing MM unfit and getting him back up to speed.Then add Drinkwater and MM raises his game.Two great signings,the rest have bought in now.
Bring on Tomkins. Intresting mix of charactors.Bring them 3 down to the DW and all of them play.Which is worrying.

4G

Mike wrote:I'm not sure I agree with this re-writing history that we got rid of him because of poor performances. That didn't seem to happen at all to me, he was just coming back after injury and that looked to be going according to schedule. It was a bit of a shock that he went and no real explanation was given IMO.

Right now he's just playing as I would expect him to given his career up to this point, no better or worse than he did for us. He was always a top quality SL hooker and to get rid of him because TL was suddenly available for a season seemed like a weird decision then and it still does now. I'm sure more was going on behind the scenes when the decision was made.

Nail on the head!

MM had a career ending injury (for most people) let’s be honest and it was bound to take time to get his fitness, sharpness, consistency but more importantly his confidence back, not in his ability but in his injured leg!!

SJ, we are all entitled to our opinions and I always respected what you said about MM and to be fair at times after his injury it was hard to disagree but for me he has always been a very very good hooker!

He has never had the endurance or speed or been as exciting to watch as Roby or Clark etc. But as I have always said when the going gets tough or in the must win game I personally would have MM every day of the week (and he can do it for 80 mins) in my team over any other hooker in SL! I think the CC semi and final showed that again as he has shown many times over the years!

I don’t think MM is a great hooker but for me neither is Roby and many on her think he is! Always said and will stock by it, when the going gets tough and the really big games Roby is often found wanting! He is a fantastic player however and consistently very good but certainly not great in my opinion!

As for this year, MM would without doubt make us a better team and to get rid of him was a ludicrous decision, with him we would win the GF without doubt, without him who knows!

Well done MM, thoroughly deserved after that horrendous injury!!

Mike wrote:I'm not sure I agree with this re-writing history that we got rid of him because of poor performances. That didn't seem to happen at all to me, he was just coming back after injury and that looked to be going according to schedule. It was a bit of a shock that he went and no real explanation was given IMO.

Right now he's just playing as I would expect him to given his career up to this point, no better or worse than he did for us. He was always a top quality SL hooker and to get rid of him because TL was suddenly available for a season seemed like a weird decision then and it still does now. I'm sure more was going on behind the scenes when the decision was made.

I agree. The idea it made sense to get rid because he wasn't 100% after a long absence due to injury when he then goes and shows he's ready for 2018 with his WC performances made the the decision to sell baffling.

He proved in the CC he is a big game player and if we get to the GF and we play Saints, there will be one player who is glad he is no longer a Wigan player if he is playing, Roby who I have yet to see have a good game against him.

What makes selling him worse is the club has left itself in a worse state in that position then before he left. None of Powell, Ganson or TL are as good a 9. Most people on here knew that and said that as well (with one notable exception). God knows what Rads ans IL were thinking.

I can remember when Wigan used to move senior players on when they reached a certain age despite still being very good players. The reason they did was because they had an even better player lined up. IL and Rads seem to have forgotten that half of the equation with this one.

DaveO wrote:

Mike wrote:I'm not sure I agree with this re-writing history that we got rid of him because of poor performances. That didn't seem to happen at all to me, he was just coming back after injury and that looked to be going according to schedule. It was a bit of a shock that he went and no real explanation was given IMO.

Right now he's just playing as I would expect him to given his career up to this point, no better or worse than he did for us. He was always a top quality SL hooker and to get rid of him because TL was suddenly available for a season seemed like a weird decision then and it still does now. I'm sure more was going on behind the scenes when the decision was made.

I agree. The idea it made sense to get rid because he wasn't 100% after a long absence due to injury when he then goes and shows he's ready for 2018 with his WC performances made the the decision to sell baffling.

He proved in the CC he is a big game player and if we get to the GF and we play Saints, there will be one player who is glad he is no longer a Wigan player if he is playing, Roby who I have yet to see have a good game against him.

What makes selling him worse is the club has left itself in a worse state in that position then before he left. None of Powell, Ganson or TL are as good a 9. Most people on here knew that and said that as well (with one notable exception). God knows what Rads ans IL were thinking.

I can remember when Wigan used to move senior players on when they reached a certain age despite still being very good players. The reason they did was because they had an even better player lined up. IL and Rads seem to have forgotten that half of the equation with this one.

Been over this before in an earlier thread.
Mickey didn't want to go.!!
IL and KR made it clear to him he needed to go. Mickey was still recovering from that dreadful injury, and they thought they had sufficient cover with Lulu, Powell and Ganson, and could save a good wedge with Mickey's wage. It was purely a financial decision.

DaveO wrote:

Mike wrote:I'm not sure I agree with this re-writing history that we got rid of him because of poor performances. That didn't seem to happen at all to me, he was just coming back after injury and that looked to be going according to schedule. It was a bit of a shock that he went and no real explanation was given IMO.

Right now he's just playing as I would expect him to given his career up to this point, no better or worse than he did for us. He was always a top quality SL hooker and to get rid of him because TL was suddenly available for a season seemed like a weird decision then and it still does now. I'm sure more was going on behind the scenes when the decision was made.

I agree. The idea it made sense to get rid because he wasn't 100% after a long absence due to injury when he then goes and shows he's ready for 2018 with his WC performances made the the decision to sell baffling.

He proved in the CC he is a big game player and if we get to the GF and we play Saints, there will be one player who is glad he is no longer a Wigan player if he is playing, Roby who I have yet to see have a good game against him.

What makes selling him worse is the club has left itself in a worse state in that position then before he left. None of Powell, Ganson or TL are as good a 9. Most people on here knew that and said that as well (with one notable exception). God knows what Rads ans IL were thinking.

I can remember when Wigan used to move senior players on when they reached a certain age despite still being very good players. The reason they did was because they had an even better player lined up. IL and Rads seem to have forgotten that half of the equation with this one.

Much that I like MM, are you seriously suggesting he is better than Roby?

Roby is one of the VERY few world class GB players we have (even now in his twighlight years).

bertina wrote:

DaveO wrote:

Mike wrote:I'm not sure I agree with this re-writing history that we got rid of him because of poor performances. That didn't seem to happen at all to me, he was just coming back after injury and that looked to be going according to schedule. It was a bit of a shock that he went and no real explanation was given IMO.

Right now he's just playing as I would expect him to given his career up to this point, no better or worse than he did for us. He was always a top quality SL hooker and to get rid of him because TL was suddenly available for a season seemed like a weird decision then and it still does now. I'm sure more was going on behind the scenes when the decision was made.

I agree. The idea it made sense to get rid because he wasn't 100% after a long absence due to injury when he then goes and shows he's ready for 2018 with his WC performances made the the decision to sell baffling.

He proved in the CC he is a big game player and if we get to the GF and we play Saints, there will be one player who is glad he is no longer a Wigan player if he is playing, Roby who I have yet to see have a good game against him.

What makes selling him worse is the club has left itself in a worse state in that position then before he left. None of Powell, Ganson or TL are as good a 9. Most people on here knew that and said that as well (with one notable exception). God knows what Rads ans IL were thinking.

I can remember when Wigan used to move senior players on when they reached a certain age despite still being very good players. The reason they did was because they had an even better player lined up. IL and Rads seem to have forgotten that half of the equation with this one.

Been over this before in an earlier thread.
Mickey didn't want to go.!!
IL and KR made it clear to him he needed to go. Mickey was still recovering from that dreadful injury, and they thought they had sufficient cover with Lulu, Powell and Ganson, and could save a good wedge with Mickey's wage. It was purely a financial decision.

a bit like Sam