WiganWarriorsFans.com

IF Hampshire goes toLeeds ,will be a major cock up by the club.Whats the point of top signings if you cannot hold your own progeny? Carelesness ,slackness of thought is increasingly evident in the club.Lets hope for the best.

JUKESAYS wrote:

x Wigan Warrior x wrote:

JUKESAYS wrote: One things for sure, whatever CP's opinion it will be right and he will be unrelenting in his posts until everyone agrees!
????

or that CP has an opinion and because he exercises his right to express that opinion strongly and in a way that you cant comprehend, you and others attack him personally instead of debating the subject .....

You have no idea what I can and can't comprehend.
I'm sure CPW will not have missed the wink at the end of my post.

Strangely enough I almost agree 100% with a lot of CPWs views on Waneball However don't feel the need to push it a hundred times a day or as can be interpreted manufacture scenarios to push that particular opinion.

I'm sure CPW is big enough and thick skinned enough not to worry about my odd post here and there (maybe 20 posts in the last 3 years on here even though I read it 2/3 times a day suggests I'm not on some kind of campaign).

I enjoy reading posts by Juke. Not offended in the slightest. We both want the same thing but as it should be we both agree sometimes and disagree sometimes.

Wigan_forever19​85​ wrote:I find it hard to believe someone like yourself CP would suggest sam couldnt be/learn halfback role having played the majority of his time there prior to madge. A cursory glance on the NZW forums will tell you their fans thing sam guides them round the park and his amount of assists last season put to bed any argument of him not playing for the team

For me its simple, sam is better at 6, he was always better when he had his hands on the ball he can pass and run which make him a good 6 he can kick although i admit its a weakness in his game.

CP does seem a little down on Sam which i cant understand.

FWIW my opinion is Sam was always better in the halves, however when madge came he had a clear game plan of having the best open field runner at 1, (a trait he has continued at souths with GI).

The worked well because of how Madge set up his teams and attacking play and it meant sam got to use all his half back skills in a role he could chip in an out of and because we were a dominant team (again due to game plans) he defensive frailties rarely got exposed.

The madge leaves, the system that made sam successful at 1 leaves with him, which is why i believe sams last season his form was what we consider poor because the system was no longer playing to his strengths at this point he should of been moved back into the halves, however he was an "established" 1 and was bought as this.

Issue is that he took that form into the NRL, beacuse of the skillset and talent of the player he will make any position work well and so has been the case, but to see the BEST of him you need to play him where he gets his hands on the ball a lot, in teams that arent coached exactly like madges then IMO thats the halves, in madges team i would have him at 1

If only it was so easy.

The classic example was Ellery, a far better player than Sam will ever be and possibly every British play since his day (Sam B may run him close).

Ellery was a half, played there even at first team level, scored some amazing tries but there was always something missing. Graham Lowe switched him to halfback / Warren Ryan to centre and he became the outstanding British RL player of the last 40 years. Yet by the logic some argue he should have played halfback because that is where he played as a junior and he had the know how / talent to own the halfback position. My reply to that is horse poop!

Sam as a halfback? I have watched more games than I care to forget re Sam at halfback. Sam can play halfback but there is always something missing just like there was with Ellery. Sam is an individual who can do great assists on the edges of left and right with a centre and wing outside him. If Sam can his first instinct is to go it alone and score for himself.

Madge saw that and played him as a full back, the Warriors saw that and kept Sam at full back. England likewise.

Give Sam the ball etc but he can do that a fullback and be a finisher rather than exercise the bigger picture whole team player that Sam is not. Worse, play Sam at half back and you put him in your defensive line to become a target. Now Sam is not a bad defender but he will never be the best nor does he like it IMO. Even at full back Sam likes to offload to wingers to do the hard yard hit ups and yet some of you want him making 30 tackles a game at half back?

It will be great when Sam returns but IMO only as a fullback. George and Rocky are both better players than Sam was as juniors and as halfbacks at the same age.

It will be great to have Sam back but the fact remains he failed in the NRL and that cast a huge shadow over his entire career.

I take your points CP, but i think that the coach and the way you set up the team has an awful lot to do with how players play and their best position.

If you play in a deep attacking line with options and you know sam will get the ball then i would agree playing him at 1, but in a wane team where the emphasis on hitting the line will flat balls then i think he would prosper much more at half back a position i believe he could play better than 90% of his ESL counterparts i would add.

You dont need to be an orchestrator to play in the halves, and i feel 6 is a position which is much more a running position with 7 being your chief organiser.

I take your point about the defensive duties but like you say he isnt a terrible defender certainly better that the likes of briers who played there for years, plus i would argue that in the line you are more protected from late hits and foul challenges that often lead to injury.

In the modern game you could argue 1,6,7,9 are all half backs now, and i think a lot depends on how you set up your team from a coaching perspective.

Under wane personally i would have Sam at 6 for those reasons