WiganWarriorsFans.com

Isnt that why they wanted him not in the front section

DaveO posted:

gab0512 posted:
If we look at everything in a cold business sense and remove all emotion: -

Player 29 years old - played top class RL for 13yrs. 2 potentially dodgy knees and missed 7 months in last 2 seasons. Club offered £400k+ to buy out contract, with player offered £200k+ per season for 3 years. Money used to buy 19 year old top international RL player as straight swap ----- Good deal YES IMO.

Emotional decision - absolutely not!

It might be a good deal if the club needed the money but it does not. Or should not with Whelan as a backer. That is a very important factor. If it was about to go belly up financially Farrell would already be a Union player as the club would have bitten the RFU's hand off.

We can't even spend the money raised. The likes of SBW are going nowhere and so the money will just sit there.

This is not just a business but a sporting club that exists to win trophies.

The club needs to ask itself will Farrell being here for the next one or two seasons aid it in that cause?

IMO, yes.

Will it be better off without him?

IMO, no.

Does anyone seriously think it will?

Dave

I said take the emotion out of the decision DaveO and look at the logic.
It may be a sporting club, but every club is run like a business. If it isn't then it will soon go bust. Whelan is not going to throw his own money into a bottomless pit - Would You? I certainly wouldn't.

If the injury is more serious than anybody is letting on, then it may be a reason Wigan are so easily prepared to sell him.

If Gleeson went for £200k or so, then £400k-£600k for an injured 29 year old is a lot of money in RL terms, and therefore an excellent business deal.

Without emotion it is a good deal for the club.

gab0512 posted:

DaveO posted:

gab0512 posted:
If we look at everything in a cold business sense and remove all emotion: -

Player 29 years old - played top class RL for 13yrs. 2 potentially dodgy knees and missed 7 months in last 2 seasons. Club offered £400k+ to buy out contract, with player offered £200k+ per season for 3 years. Money used to buy 19 year old top international RL player as straight swap ----- Good deal YES IMO.

Emotional decision - absolutely not!

It might be a good deal if the club needed the money but it does not. Or should not with Whelan as a backer. That is a very important factor. If it was about to go belly up financially Farrell would already be a Union player as the club would have bitten the RFU's hand off.

We can't even spend the money raised. The likes of SBW are going nowhere and so the money will just sit there.

This is not just a business but a sporting club that exists to win trophies.

The club needs to ask itself will Farrell being here for the next one or two seasons aid it in that cause?

IMO, yes.

Will it be better off without him?

IMO, no.

Does anyone seriously think it will?

Dave

I said take the emotion out of the decision DaveO and look at the logic.

Where is the emotion in any of what I posted? It is, if I say so myself, a well reasoned argument as to why the club ought not to get rid of Farrell.

It may be a sporting club, but every club is run like a business. If it isn't then it will soon go bust. Whelan is not going to throw his own money into a bottomless pit - Would You? I certainly wouldn't.

He is doing a good impression of that at Latics. This by comparision is chicken feed.

If the injury is more serious than anybody is letting on, then it may be a reason Wigan are so easily prepared to sell him.

If Gleeson went for £200k or so, then £400k-£600k for an injured 29 year old is a lot of money in RL terms, and therefore an excellent business deal.

Without emotion it is a good deal for the club.

You are speculating about the injury and if the injury is more serious he will fail the medical and RFU won't sign him.

£400K for the club is only a good deal if it needs the money and can invest it in imporving the squad.

It ought not to need the money and no one worth having is available to improve the squad so I can't see how getting rid of your bext player makes any sense at all.

That is not emotion but common sense IMO.

Dave

Hi DaveO - Without being on the inside at Latics or Warriors for that matter, one would assume that the money being spent on football is intended to gain promotion to the premier league. With the rewards of TV money etc etc the amount spent can be justified. However, failure to gain that promotion may then require a re-adjustment of the spending policy.

Unfortunately in our greater sport, we don't have the luxury of earning the same level of income from TV rights etc. Therefore, and bearing in mind the virtual non existence of transfer fees in RL. I think it is a good business deal for a player who is entering the final years of his career. We can't look back and say he has not given great service to Wigan & RL in general, but that is gone, and we have to weigh up his potential for the future. At 29 and already having 2 serious knee operations, he may not come back to be the player he once was.

This is speculation on my part, and that's the sort of gamble you take in sport. We did it with Ellery and no doubt we will do it again. I just think that £400k + as is talked about, is too good an opportunity to give up. The debate on will he or won't he be missed, will carry on well past the actual decision. Everytime we lose - we miss him and terrible decision to let him go. Everytime we win - not missed - the king is dead long live the king.

I do actually agree with you that letting Faz go will be a terrible decision imo. However, I am rying to offer some logic (and have a good debate) as to why if he he should go, it may not be all that bad.

SBW saying he wants to stay at Canterbury may well be meaningless. Money usually talks in this day and age, and if he can get £250-300k a year with Wigan he could be persuaded to change his mind. I think if he does quit Aus then it will be only to us. The mixed messages could be just a smokescreen to bump up his wages.

DaveO posted:

proud_pie_eater posted:
Yes BUT on teletext today, it says Farrell is pencilled in to play in the Churchill Cup this summer. RL lasts all summer, if he stays with Wigan to the end of his contract thats not possible so whats going on!

I think the other possible answer for Faz choosing to go to union is: Wigan Rugby Club are going to recieve a big pay off from union for signing Farrell, if Wigan arent offering him a new contract then he has no other option than to go to union because I dont think he would ever play against Wigan so moving to anohter RL club is out! Farrell has the option to go but I think the club has more power over his decision than he does. What means more to Maurice, Farrell playing for Wigan, or money?

The thing I understand the least about all this is the reaction (or lack of it) from the club.

The fact he could walk away in two years time for nothing should not be a factor. That is how contracts work. I am certain he would be offered another two year deal anyway. So the club would not receive a big payout - but so what? We have Dave Whelan as a backer and should not need to cash in on any player.

I tend to think the reason it has not been announced already that he has gone is that Wigan want him to see out this season. We have no replacement for him and are unlikely to get one. It leaves us very short handed of experienced players never mind robbing us of the club captain and arguably the best player we (and RL) has on its books.

The club owes it to the fans to put out the strongest squad it can within the rules of the salary cap and if they let Farrell go now they won't be doing that.

If they let him go at the end of the season then they are being more than fair in my opinion. He will still have a year to go on his contract so they will be doing him a favour. If it does not fit in with what the RFU (and possibly Farrell) want, so what? The club has to do the best for itself and and the fans.

Dave

PS That OK Welski?

Hehehe

I agree its very odd that Wigan havent made a definitive statement maybe they will when it is sorted either way.

As I said earlier its seems that all parties have agreed its best all round that Faz plays out this season then with the large wad we get for him we could look to strengthen the squad for the start of next season...(or more likely go for a big name replacement (SBW etc))

Something else that hasn't been mentioned is maybe Wigan have looked at Faz's recent track record on the injury front....from not missing a game for years he has suddenly (understandably) started picking up one after another. Given our overall recent record in this area maybe the thinking is that a durable good player is better than an outstanding injury prone one?

i think his injuries come from playing with niggles that should have been rested.he should of had an op and missed the tri nations imo

gab0512 posted:
Hi DaveO - Without being on the inside at Latics or Warriors for that matter, one would assume that the money being spent on football is intended to gain promotion to the premier league. With the rewards of TV money etc etc the amount spent can be justified. However, failure to gain that promotion may then require a re-adjustment of the spending policy.

Premier league clubs need feeding with lots of cash once promoted if they intend to stay there. It is an ongoing investment and the fact DWi s prepared to make it ought to mean IMO he could dismiss £400K off the RFU going into Wigan RL's coffers quite easily. If the club do sell Farrell and come out with statements about it being good to get the dosh I think we are entitled to question just what good it is having DW in the position he is.

Unfortunately in our greater sport, we don't have the luxury of earning the same level of income from TV rights etc. Therefore, and bearing in mind the virtual non existence of transfer fees in RL. I think it is a good business deal for a player who is entering the final years of his career.

No one was saying this three weeks ago despite his injury. We were all looking forward to a competative season with a good squad and the idea of cashing in on Faz was unheard of. The idea he was in the twilight of his career was also nowhere to be heard.

Wigan could have put Farrell on the transfer market and got a fee in excess of that Saints got for Gleeson so if it was good business to cash in why didn't the club just stick him on the transfer list?

If you had said to anyone involved in the game "Wigan are going to seel Farrell" three weeks ago they would have laughed at you. I don't see what has changed regarding the logic of selling him.

We can't look back and say he has not given great service to Wigan & RL in general, but that is gone, and we have to weigh up his potential for the future. At 29 and already having 2 serious knee operations, he may not come back to be the player he once was.

This is speculation on my part, and that's the sort of gamble you take in sport. We did it with Ellery and no doubt we will do it again. I just think that £400k + as is talked about, is too good an opportunity to give up. The debate on will he or won't he be missed, will carry on well past the actual decision. Everytime we lose - we miss him and terrible decision to let him go. Everytime we win - not missed - the king is dead long live the king.

That is obviously true but you can't honestly say the squad is stronger without him in it which is the bottom line IMO. As to him being 29 with dodgy knees if we write off 29 year olds why do we sign 31+ year old players from Australia and NZ?

SBW saying he wants to stay at Canterbury may well be meaningless. Money usually talks in this day and age, and if he can get £250-300k a year with Wigan he could be persuaded to change his mind. I think if he does quit Aus then it will be only to us. The mixed messages could be just a smokescreen to bump up his wages.

I am sure SBW signing would placate many but you can only go off what is the likely outcome and at the moment that could be no Faz and no replacement. If that happens the club are selling us short IMO.

The lesser of two evils would be Faz playing this season out so we would not be short handed and have plenty of time to sort out a squad for 2006.

Dave

DaveO - DW complains at paying £15k for policing, do you really think he would not bother with getting £400k + on a player who came through the ranks?

I am of the opinion that DW has earned the right to invest whatever he likes in latics, and not that bothered he does. He has earned his money with hard work, and I was grateful he stepped in when we were 2 hours from not ceasing to exist. Not really that long ago.

With regards to selling Faz. If we would have put him on the open market, the likelihood is that people would be questioning why? Then we would be thinking who could afford both the transfer fee and wage demands in the RL world? This would (if the RFU were thinking about it) only lower his valuation as there would be a shortage of available buyers. It is always best to be approached for, rather than offer a player imo.

I haven't changed my view that Faz going wouldn't be a loss to our team at the moment. However, it may finally make the other players step up and earn what they get paid. We cannot exist as a mainly one man team, and if Faz going means it makes us better in the long term - then fine.

Like you say, the less of the two evils would be to wait until the end of the RL season. If this though causes the deal to collapse, then I would do the deal now.

Warriors_ace_17 posted:
Well have you seen any of the England Rugby Union games of late, and the quality of their forwards. they go some way to explaining why they want Faz so badly

There is no chance Faz could play forward for rugby union, you realy need to be built like a brick **** house (or just fat and heavy) to play a forward in union!

proud_pie_eater posted:

Warriors_ace_17 posted:
Well have you seen any of the England Rugby Union games of late, and the quality of their forwards. they go some way to explaining why they want Faz so badly

There is no chance Faz could play forward for rugby union, you realy need to be built like a brick **** house (or just fat and heavy) to play a forward in union!

That's front row forward though isn't it, isn't he being touted for flanker which is kind of third row isn't it?

My understanding is that Props are fat, 2nd Rowers are like League props and third rows are built like our second rows?