WiganWarriorsFans.com

Already got green and smith so what would be the point?

Wigan Warriors No 1 fan wrote:Already got green and smith so what would be the point?

If rumours have element of truth to them, a possible replacement for Sam at FB? I personally think he is better in halves.

Wigan Warriors No 1 fan wrote:Already got green and smith so what would be the point?

None whatsoever IMO. He is under contract to Stains who would be demanding a massive fee for a player who may prove, to our long term cost, to be inferior to Salford's Hampshire or Warrington's Tierney.

Can no-one see where I am going with this? Why should Stains problems be allowed to upset our successful model!

Kittwazzer wrote:

Wigan Warriors No 1 fan wrote:Already got green and smith so what would be the point?

None whatsoever IMO. He is under contract to Stains who would be demanding a massive fee for a player who may prove, to our long term cost, to be inferior to Salford's Hampshire or Warrington's Tierney.

Can no-one see where I am going with this? Why should Stains problems be allowed to upset our successful model!

But is Lomax's ability too much of a temptation? Out of interest, from our existing academy lads, who would replace Sam at FB? IMO Hampshire is not the long term solution, he will play in the halves replacing Green. We haven't got an adequate academy FB to replace Sam from next year.
Likewise we haven't got an adequate academy winger to replace Pat from next year.

Bugger it. I'm just going to say massive fee, Salford will pay and go to bed.

Night all!

Kittwazzer wrote:None whatsoever IMO. He is under contract to Stains who would be demanding a massive fee for a player who may prove, to our long term cost, to be inferior to Salford's Hampshire or Warrington's Tierney.

Can no-one see where I am going with this? Why should Stains problems be allowed to upset our successful model!

Kittwazzer wrote: Bugger it. I'm just going to say massive fee, Salford will pay and go to bed.

Night all!

KW I am p*s***g my self with laughter here. Well said sir!!
With regard our earlier crossed line posts, I would only take him if there was no fee and we needed him, which I sincerely hope we don't

I don't even know why we are discussing Lomax??
He is tied to Saints for at least another 3 yrs, so would cost a bomb.
If Latics go down we will need a quarter of a mullion for the certain rise Whelan will bang us with.

cow yeds wrote:I don't even know why we are discussing Lomax??
He is tied to Saints for at least another 3 yrs, so would cost a bomb.
If Latics go down we will need a quarter of a mullion for the certain rise Whelan will bang us with.

I believe we are discussing as a possible replacement for Sam at FB. As has been discussed, do we have an adequate replacement for next year!?

This rumour is obviously not going to go away. As an addition, someone on RedVee has suggested it is nonsense that we have had a £300,000 bid turned down.

If there was any foundation to this it would start to make some sense. If we have made such a bid and Lomax is aware of it and would like to come, it might explain his continued absence.

Awful lot of ifs though!

Let's put this rumour to bed.

Lomax is definitely injured!!!

We haven't made a £300,000 offer for him!!!

The lad himself is tweeting that he is fed up with all the daft rumours going about.