WiganWarriorsFans.com

nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 9:50 am

Mickw wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 12:39 am 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)

Caboosegg wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 10:51 am

nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 9:50 am

Mickw wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 12:39 am 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 prips 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)

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…

nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 11:16 am

Caboosegg wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 10:51 am

nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 9:50 am
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 prips 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)

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

We are now heading towards the middle of July Hampshire has appeared twice on what planet is that a "good signing" ACL injuries always seem to take their time healing and in a salary capped sport as I've already said this morning that is a move bordering on reckless to offer a contract to a player carrying such an injury.

I still believe we should have signed gareth obrien instead of hampshire

Blackpool_Pie wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 11:27 am

nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 11:16 am

Caboosegg wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 10:51 am

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 prips 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)

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.

Caboosegg wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 9:16 am

DaveO wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 12:47 am

Caboosegg wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:56 pm

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.

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.

EDINBURGH-WARRIOR wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 7:49 am 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

This is the point I have been making in this thread and the other two that discuss this issue. I really don’t think the club handle recruitment very well. As you say Miski is 3rd choice and he’s just a competent winger, not a super star. A few decent games and the club do the “nice” thing and extend his deal. Loyalty to a player who no doubt has bought into the culture but ultimately is nothing special. Another example of valuing effort over ability.

This is just typical of how this club operates. No thought to the wider issue of the fact he takes a quota spot up and ignoring the issue at 6 which if they ever solve it ought to see him back out of the 17.

Although Dagger kicked all his goals, his tactical kicking was dreadful. Smith may have missed 2 out of 5 goal kicks but his tactical kicking was excellent (bar one shank) all night.

Like many of you posting today I'm really feeling the frustration of our situation. Despite our more positive posters saying that one game doesn't matter and everything will be O.K. for the Cup match, results like last night are just not acceptable if we really do intend to challenge for honours. No matter how much we try to dissect our problems by thinking about Smith, Shorrocks, Miski, Bevan/Jai and the hooking situation the bottom line is that if our props were good enough we'd have won last night. A good set of props would enable us to win games when the rest of the team is not functioning well. I know Cooper were missing and Havard was injured early in the game but our props, as a group, have not been good enough for several years. I don't think we can solve the problem this year and, despite a promising start to recruitment, we haven't yet sorted it sufficiently for next season. We can't go into yet another season with a pack that isn't up to the job. Walters looks promising but Chan is another project (who can't get a game for his present side) so we still need another good quality experienced prop especially for those matches where Cooper is still absent and another prop is injured or banned. I'd also add, that one of the many possible reasons for the loss last night is that we had a fully fit player unavailable because of his stupidity a couple of weeks ago. I'd argue that Ellis was as much to blame for the loss as any of those on the pitch last night.