BETTS OUT

Discuss all things Wigan Warriors. Comments and opinions on all aspects of the club's performance are welcome.
User avatar
mrs_carney
Posts: 3566
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by mrs_carney »

Exactly, Faz wanted to leave for a new challenge, so he should be training with the saracens not us, it cant be doing us any good as a team having him ruling the roost in training and not being able to do the same on the field. He was allowed to come on the wigan coach with all the players, WHY? Officially i suppose he still is a wigan player until hes out there with a saracens shirt on but i dont think he's the kind of distraction we need at the moment, newton or rads whoevers fit, needs to be the one doing the talking and ordering. If he's going he should just go and be a spectator, not mixing in with the running of things.
11/07/05 x - Always and forever - x <3
thegimble
Posts: 5923
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:09 am

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by thegimble »

mrs_carney posted:
Exactly, Faz wanted to leave for a new challenge, so he should be training with the saracens not us, it cant be doing us any good as a team having him ruling the roost in training and not being able to do the same on the field. He was allowed to come on the wigan coach with all the players, WHY? Officially i suppose he still is a wigan player until hes out there with a saracens shirt on but i dont think he's the kind of distraction we need at the moment, newton or rads whoevers fit, needs to be the one doing the talking and ordering. If he's going he should just go and be a spectator, not mixing in with the running of things.
Spot On
User avatar
robjoenz
Posts: 5458
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 5:25 pm

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by robjoenz »

mrs_carney posted:
Exactly, Faz wanted to leave for a new challenge, so he should be training with the saracens not us, it cant be doing us any good as a team having him ruling the roost in training and not being able to do the same on the field. He was allowed to come on the wigan coach with all the players, WHY? Officially i suppose he still is a wigan player until hes out there with a saracens shirt on but i dont think he's the kind of distraction we need at the moment, newton or rads whoevers fit, needs to be the one doing the talking and ordering. If he's going he should just go and be a spectator, not mixing in with the running of things.
He's just been acting as coaching staff as far as I can make out. They coach the team but don't play the games. He's not a Saracens player until 1st June so he should be making himself useful at Wigan. As with Lammy he has a lot he can pass on to the younger players away from the playing field.

On the point about him playing, we need to learn to play without him. We seem to be just about coming to terms with him not playing, why bring him back and then have to restart learning to play without him in two weeks time?
User avatar
HappyHooker
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:15 pm

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by HappyHooker »

robjoenz posted:
why bring him back and then have to restart learning to play without him in two weeks time?
exactly! it would mess us up. he would spread th go forward (what we need), but also direct much of the play - this is where we need to let orr and sometimes brown learn, and develop. we need to let danny prove himself and improve himself, not just swap him for faz till he goes off with his union chums
Being a warrior is not just a past-time; it's a choice of life.
Doveoverdave
Posts: 1949
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:36 am

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by Doveoverdave »

HappyHooker posted:
robjoenz posted:
why bring him back and then have to restart learning to play without him in two weeks time?
exactly! it would mess us up. he would spread th go forward (what we need), but also direct much of the play - this is where we need to let orr and sometimes brown learn, and develop. we need to let danny prove himself and improve himself, not just swap him for faz till he goes off with his union chums
We really shouldn't be waiting for Orr to develop, he was a GB international before we signed him! The club has given him a 4 year deal beause they thought he was the finished article - big mistake. :conf:
DaveO
Posts: 15987
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by DaveO »

robjoenz posted:
He's just been acting as coaching staff as far as I can make out. They coach the team but don't play the games. He's not a Saracens player until 1st June so he should be making himself useful at Wigan. As with Lammy he has a lot he can pass on to the younger players away from the playing field.
It is a very odd situation. If, as you say below we need to learn to play without him we need to learn to caoch without him as well. What happens come June 1st and his words of wisdom are no longer available? Should we expect even worse from our lot?

He is also, IMO, given the current state of the team a darn sight more useful on the pitch than off it.
On the point about him playing, we need to learn to play without him. We seem to be just about coming to terms with him not playing, why bring him back and then have to restart learning to play without him in two weeks time?
Because the team is playing rubbish, does not have a recognised loose forward of adiquate ability available and is leaderless on the pitch. Or hand't you noticed?

If he is being paid by the club given the current state we are in we can't afford the luxery of "learning to play witout him". We can do that when there is no alternative and more importantly when we have a few more points on the board.

We'd have won that game v Wire with him playing there is no doubt in my mind about that so if we are paying him, he is fit then we are just chucking league points away while adding to his bank balance.

The Farrell saga has got to be Mo's biggest screw up in all his time at the club!

Dave
DaveO
Posts: 15987
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by DaveO »

HappyHooker posted:
robjoenz posted:
why bring him back and then have to restart learning to play without him in two weeks time?
exactly! it would mess us up.
Mess us up? This is hilarious. We are already messed up! We don't have a recognised loose forward except Allen. We are leaderless on the pitch. We have lost four out of the last five games and we are paying arguably the best player in the British game to warm the bench when he posesses the very qualities we are lacking.

We might only have got a months or so's games out of him but to say playing him would mess up the current team is a joke!
he would spread th go forward (what we need), but also direct much of the play - this is where we need to let orr and sometimes brown learn, and develop. we need to let danny prove himself and improve himself, not just swap him for faz till he goes off with his union chums
Sorry but this post gets my vote as the biggest pile of blinkered nonsense I have read on a message board. I am not tryng to be rude but I just can't believe what I have just read.

There isn't anyone directing anything on the pitch at the minute. We are missing Farrell immensly and I for one don't think being 6 points ahead of the second bottom team is a time to give players a chance to learn because at the moment points is what we need and we would be much more likely to get some of those with Farrell in the side than without.

Dave
stannie
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 1:08 am

Re: BETTS OUT

Post by stannie »

Betts has to go!!!

Come on maurice sign Milward. It would better the sigings of Connelly, and Platt.

Lets have him in place for the cup tie
Post Reply