Re: MORLEY

Discuss all things Wigan Warriors. Comments and opinions on all aspects of the club's performance are welcome.
primrose-n-blue
Posts: 763
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:23 am

Re: MORLEY

Post by primrose-n-blue »

mike binder posted:
:) and as we said all 4 left by there own choice now we have proved our selfs right lets put this 1 to bed , :wink:
I never said what there reasons for leaving were...I just raised the point that Wigan have "released" 4 from there club as I was grilled about one of our team not being able to see out the remainder.

It doesn't matter who wants what...Wigan held contracts and chose to wrap them up...period.
I have no concern what the reasons are. Wigan could make anyone of them serve the remainder of what ever contractual requirements they have...Its why we have contracts.

And still I cannot get 22 to equal 23???
Have you managed it yet?
No?
So I guess we can say that 1998 was niether a level playing field either.

It will not happen untill 2009, thats when we can push to have the minor joke premiers reinstated as the league champions.
thegimble
Posts: 5907
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:09 am

Re: MORLEY

Post by thegimble »

PNB on another page i said that they should increase the teams in SL to 14 next season.

Have 1 go down instead of 2 eg Widnes stays up.
Catlalans side would make 14.

Then over the next 2 seasons bring in a side from Wales they have the backing of the milionaire who owns the Celtic Manor complex (Ryder Cup 2009). Also with the backlash of how the Celtic Warriors was kicked out by the WRU they could get some decent support. The guy already has the Bridgend side up and running and is adement hes going to SL.

That would make 15 teams and 28 games. What is so wrong is that we play Saints and Rhinos 3 times a season. Now if we would have lost more games and be within a point or 2 to Widnes then we could have been relegated due to the fact we played the best 3 times and they got Leigh 3 times.

Wed be better going bye weeks and playing teams twice a season. Present system is flawed and needs addressing urgently.
Fraggle
Posts: 6020
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2002 3:12 pm
Contact:

Re: MORLEY

Post by Fraggle »

primrose-n-blue posted:
Wigan held contracts and chose to wrap them up...period.
And this is the point you can't seem to grasp. With the exception of Davico for medical reasons, Wigan haven't changed anyone else's contract.

Betts' contract was as Assistant Coach, and still is so Wigan have changed nothing. He has never held a contract as Head Coach so how can the club have "wrapped up" such a contract?

Do conditioners have contracts, or are they open-ended things like many of us will have, to be terminated with a certain notice period on either side? Nigel Ashley-Jones has exercised his right to terminate his contract, Wigan have done nothing as far as has been made public. If NAJ and Milly can't work together then that's between themselves rather than the club.

Old Macdonald's contract was held by Leeds, and Huddersfield made a deal with Leeds to take over that contract. Wigan have done nothing in this case as the contract was not theirs to do anything with.

I was led to believe (until he reappeared to sign up to play next year) that Davico had retired for medical reasons following the recurrence of his injury, and so Wigan, the player and the respective insurance companies will have reached an agreement to write-off the contract. This, however, had no impact on SL this season at all as the player took no part in the season so isn't really relevant to anything except that many clubs have released injured players in scenarios like this and have replaced those players. You lot haven't released anyone this season AFAIK.

The only other contract that has been changed this year was Farrell's, and no-one can say that was for any reason other than at the player's own request. Have Wood or Appo asked for a release to accommodate Johns? I somehow doubt it.

It's a minor point in your overall argument, but it would be nice for you to admit you were wrong in suggesting Wigan had terminated 4 contracts this year as a way of justifying your lot (presumably to mean overseas quota) having to terminate one contract to allow Johns to come to the UK.

I've said elsewhere, I don't like this bringing in players just for the play-offs (and said so when St Helens did the same thing 2-3 years ago) but it's within the current rules so nothing should be done this year. I hope there's a bit of a review before next season, but I suspect the publicity-hungry league will instead look at the amount of column inches bringing Johns to the UK is generating and allow it to continue, even if no UK clubs are able to bring such a big name along in the future.
http://fraggle.fotopic.net

"You rescue me, you are my faith, my hope, my liberty.
And when there's darkness all around, you shine bright for me, you are a guiding light to me....
You are a Tower of Strength to me" - Wayne Hussey, The Mission.

Shepherd's Bush Empire - 27/Feb/08 - 1/Mar/08
[hr]
mike binder
Posts: 9763
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:17 pm

Re: MORLEY

Post by mike binder »

Fraggle posted:
primrose-n-blue posted:
Wigan held contracts and chose to wrap them up...period.
And this is the point you can't seem to grasp. With the exception of Davico for medical reasons, Wigan haven't changed anyone else's contract.

Betts' contract was as Assistant Coach, and still is so Wigan have changed nothing. He has never held a contract as Head Coach so how can the club have "wrapped up" such a contract?

Do conditioners have contracts, or are they open-ended things like many of us will have, to be terminated with a certain notice period on either side? Nigel Ashley-Jones has exercised his right to terminate his contract, Wigan have done nothing as far as has been made public. If NAJ and Milly can't work together then that's between themselves rather than the club.

Old Macdonald's contract was held by Leeds, and Huddersfield made a deal with Leeds to take over that contract. Wigan have done nothing in this case as the contract was not theirs to do anything with.

I was led to believe (until he reappeared to sign up to play next year) that Davico had retired for medical reasons following the recurrence of his injury, and so Wigan, the player and the respective insurance companies will have reached an agreement to write-off the contract. This, however, had no impact on SL this season at all as the player took no part in the season so isn't really relevant to anything except that many clubs have released injured players in scenarios like this and have replaced those players. You lot haven't released anyone this season AFAIK.

The only other contract that has been changed this year was Farrell's, and no-one can say that was for any reason other than at the player's own request. Have Wood or Appo asked for a release to accommodate Johns? I somehow doubt it.

It's a minor point in your overall argument, but it would be nice for you to admit you were wrong in suggesting Wigan had terminated 4 contracts this year as a way of justifying your lot (presumably to mean overseas quota) having to terminate one contract to allow Johns to come to the UK.

I've said elsewhere, I don't like this bringing in players just for the play-offs (and said so when St Helens did the same thing 2-3 years ago) but it's within the current rules so nothing should be done this year. I hope there's a bit of a review before next season, but I suspect the publicity-hungry league will instead look at the amount of column inches bringing Johns to the UK is generating and allow it to continue, even if no UK clubs are able to bring such a big name along in the future.
as p n b gone alittle quiet a bit like our freind st rob,did a couple of weeks ago :sly:
mikebinderflooring@yahoo.co.uk for all your carpets and vinyls suppiled and fitted


TROPHIES COMING HOME
IT COMING HOME
ITS COMING HOME
ITS COMING
TROPHIES COMING HOME
GeoffN
Posts: 12559
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 1:40 pm

Re: MORLEY

Post by GeoffN »

mike binder posted:
as p n b gone alittle quiet a bit like our freind st rob,did a couple of weeks ago :sly:
Dunno, but he clearly wasn't at the Huddersfield match!
primrose-n-blue
Posts: 763
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 2:23 am

Re: MORLEY

Post by primrose-n-blue »

I'm still here and those 4 have still gone!
And 22 still doesn't equate to 23!!
:wink:
GeoffN
Posts: 12559
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 1:40 pm

Re: MORLEY

Post by GeoffN »

primrose-n-blue posted:
I'm still here and those 4 have still gone!
And 22 still doesn't equate to 23!!
:wink:
but losing 38-22 is just as bad as 38-23 :wink:
mike binder
Posts: 9763
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:17 pm

Re: MORLEY

Post by mike binder »

:lol: well spotted geoff how good of warrington to prove to him 22 is 22 and 23 is 23,looking at them yesterday they could lose every game they have left and wed could replace them in playoffs :lol:
mikebinderflooring@yahoo.co.uk for all your carpets and vinyls suppiled and fitted


TROPHIES COMING HOME
IT COMING HOME
ITS COMING HOME
ITS COMING
TROPHIES COMING HOME
thegimble
Posts: 5907
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:09 am

Re: MORLEY

Post by thegimble »

primrose-n-blue posted:
I'm still here and those 4 have still gone!
And 22 still doesn't equate to 23!!
:wink:

Yes we have a life.
Post Reply