Re: Hansen

[Kittwazzer]

We need a new chairman, one with bigger pockets than IL.

Wave a cheque book and IL will sell. He obviously can't resist even the likes of Salford never mind the NRL

Charnely next? Why not? He's one of the few class players we have left.

It's been open season on our players since IL got here.

I am sure someone will say look we won two trophies last season but that was WITH Hansen, Mossop and Sam T all plying key roles in the victories.

In Hock and Hansen Salford have a better 2nd row that us next season if not the best in the league.

Mid table mediocrity, here we come.

I don't know why you bother supporting the club as you are only happy when something comes along to have a swipe at the club, chairman, coach or anything that you think fits.

Time that you faced the fact that under the present chairman and owner, it has become more successful on the field and more sound financially off it.

The loss of Hansen is not the end of the world for the club and never will be as no player is bigger than it.

Your right WW but are you not a little concerned on how easy we buckle on letting players go when ££ signs are flashed.I am 100% sure Hansen did not want to leave regardless of what the spin doctors are trying to have us believe.Who next?.

I'd say whoever can be considered as 'replaceable from within' when the right offer comes along. We named a squad of 37 players who will all be hoping to get some first team action. Provided we leave ourselves with adequate cover, I am happy to see older players make way for younger talent. Especially if a decent fee is offered. There is no room for sentiment!

[DaveO]

At worst Wigan should just have taken the hit of no fee after next year.

He could have still gone to Salford and got a big contract as there would be plenty of interest in him at 29 as this is now.

Not if his wrist gives out halfway through next season!

He came back from that injury and I don't think he missed another game all season, certainly not one down to that injury coming back.

If selling Hansen is sensible because he might get a recurrence why hasn't Lockers gone with him?

Lockers was has been far more injury prone than Hansen over the last couple of seasons.

We also bought Bowen who was let go because his club felt his knees were not up to another season in the NRL.

If we can sign Bowen and assume he is going to be OK then we can't really use to the excuse Hansen's wrist might give out at the same time.

[DaveO]

Your right WW but are you not a little concerned on how easy we buckle on letting players go when ££ signs are flashed.I am 100% sure Hansen did not want to leave regardless of what the spin doctors are trying to have us believe.Who next?.

I'd say whoever can be considered as 'replaceable from within' when the right offer comes along. We named a squad of 37 players who will all be hoping to get some first team action. Provided we leave ourselves with adequate cover, I am happy to see older players make way for younger talent. Especially if a decent fee is offered. There is no room for sentiment!

Hansen is not an "older" player. He is 28. And of those 37 there isn't one player in H position as good. Someone will get his no 11 jersey but there is a bit more too it than that to fill his shoes.

This is very different to what Wigan did under Mo when players like Ian Potter who IIRC was 31 was shown the door instead of given a new deal. They were older players.

I can't recall a top player of Hansen's stature in their 20's being sold back then. In fact it was at age 28 we re-signed Denis Betts.

[keptinthedarkfans]

.

I'd say whoever can be considered as 'replaceable from within' when the right offer comes along. We named a squad of 37 players who will all be hoping to get some first team action. Provided we leave ourselves with adequate cover, I am happy to see older players make way for younger talent. Especially if a decent fee is offered. There is no room for sentiment![/quote]


Older players?I can't see them (perhaps Hock)Sorry but I can't see any of signings better than what we have let go all I see are cheaper options. we sell TOMKINS/TUSON/MOSSOP/HOCK /HANSEN.
We Buy BATEMAN/BOWEN/HOPKINS/PETTYBOURNE/CLUBB/SARGINSON.

[DaveO]

Dave you have my admiration for trying to swim against the tide on RLfans. Remember H is now a 'crap' player who somehow held Wigan RLFC to ransom despite the said club having a full season to renegotiate a new longer contract and not even showing any inclination to do so. Still Salford are 'crap' too and he will never win anything there as it will take them 5 or 6 season to be competitive!

There are a few dissenting voices from the more sensible posters such as Jonh but the interesting one to watch is Rouges. This must be doing his head in because last season he started a thread about Hansen stating how great he was and how underrated a player by his own fans he was (very true).

While he certainly hasn't said anything like his wrist is "shattered" as one poster did he is treading very carefully just pointing out who we have coming through while not actually saying they are good enough to replace H.

You'd think he was trying to give the impression of towing the corporate line when really he doesn't agree with it.

The number of posters who obviously don't agree with this move but feel the need to quality their posts with a "but.." is quite funny. Just what are they scared of that they can't voice a simple opinion that they disagree with this move?

[Kittwazzer]

Dave. The replacements don't have to be 'as good as', they merely need to be 'good enough' to compete at this level and I would suggest we have 'good enough' in abundance, in all positions.

I recall your exasperation this time last year when we let Lima go home early and you felt the club hadn't tried hard enough to keep Brett Finch. Yet, we went on to take the double. If we do that every year, I won't care who's names are on the back of the shirts. That said, if we were to slip into the Doldrums and it can be unquestionably put down to irresponsible player dealings, then I would be happy to join you in your criticism, but I prefer to wait until it happens.

if I'm honest, I'm more nervous about Matty Russell coming back to haunt us than H. And we didn't get a penny for him!

[Exiled Wiganer]

Leaving aside intangibles, which is a lot to leave aside, if you go and look at the statistics on the Super League site, for Hughes, Hansen and Farrell, they make interesting reading, and may put people's mind at rest. Having seen a fair bit of all the players we have signed, in person and on the TV, I'd say we've done very good business. Much better business than I thought we'd done last year.
Your key positions are 1, 6, 7, 9 and 13. We have continuity in 4 of those, plus Hampshire and others developing nicely. Bowen for 2013 vintage Sam is not a bad swap, and Bowen is certainly the stand out NRL signing this year.
My "issue" is more to do with how this appears to have been handled, as I think H deserved something of a send off. If Salford value him much more highly than we do, and our coaching staff see him every day, then it seems to be good business for both sides. I can understand people's feelings running high, as he was so obviously a courageous trier over a long period of time, inclding through some dark days. I thought that the club's press release was suitably eulogic, at least.

[cow yeds]

I'm one who has always admired H and am sad to see him go, i think he is a top class second rower.

[Kittwazzer]

Leaving aside intangibles, which is a lot to leave aside, if you go and look at the statistics on the Super League site, for Hughes, Hansen and Farrell, they make interesting reading, and may put people's mind at rest. Having seen a fair bit of all the players we have signed, in person and on the TV, I'd say we've done very good business. Much better business than I thought we'd done last year.
Your key positions are 1, 6, 7, 9 and 13. We have continuity in 4 of those, plus Hampshire and others developing nicely. Bowen for 2013 vintage Sam is not a bad swap, and Bowen is certainly the stand out NRL signing this year.
My "issue" is more to do with how this appears to have been handled, as I think H deserved something of a send off. If Salford value him much more highly than we do, and our coaching staff see him every day, then it seems to be good business for both sides. I can understand people's feelings running high, as he was so obviously a courageous trier over a long period of time, inclding through some dark days. I thought that the club's press release was suitably eulogic, at least.

I generally agree with that exile,the treatment of the departure is typical of our club over the years,we don't stand in a players way if he wants to go and we don't dwell on sentimentality when they feel it's time to move a player on.
Unlike Leeds who's pivotal players are now to old we are not afraid to keep evolving,we've signed good quality replacements so it's onwards and upwards.HH was good for us but we were good for him as well.

Well put, especially your reference to Leeds. If you're standing still, you're going backwards!

[cpwigan]

I would argue Leeds have managed several departures very well to win several GFs. The outside backs have got better in recent seasons with the capture of Hardaker, Moon & now Briscoe + the emergence of Watkins.

I think we have some superb talents in the academy etc BUT we are really testing ourselves in the immediate / short term.

The plain truth is that youngsters / new signings flourish best with key leaders / players etc already in place. It went pear shaped when we lost too many of those type of players at the same time.

Time will tell!

Remember my prediction; Salford will reach a final in 2013!