WiganWarriorsFans.com

Anybody have any ideas on the team for 2010?? i think ...

1. Phelps
2.Roberts
3.Gleeson
4.Carmont
5. Richards
6. S.Tomkins
7. Leuluai
8. Fielden
9. Ridell
10. Feka
11.J. Tomkins
12. Bailey
13. O'Loughlin

this years team....?


surely the most pointless thread of the year then


:eh: :conf:

I think that he may have been referring to squad numbers/first choice team

Matthew wrote:I think that he may have been referring to squad numbers/first choice team

once the squad has been named it doesn't really bare much importance re first 13....


and again, it'll be the same squad as this year

the-Bowtun-Warr ior wrote:

once the squad has been named it doesn't really bare much importance re first 13....

Seems to have worked OK at Leeds though!!

Well, I would like to see...
1 - Phelps (he is really coming on, and showing why he was an Aussie junior rep player)
2 - Ainscough (if only Amos' wife allowed him to follow the Barrett path of legging it early)
3 - Gleeson
4 - Carmont
5 - Richards
6 - Sam T
7 - new player (Brough?)
8 - Prescott (Fielden doesn't merit a starting number)
9 - McIllorum (ditto Piggy)
10 - Coley (ditto Feca)
11 - Hansen (has stepped up in Hock's absence, I am beginning to see why DaveO rates him)
12 - Joel T
13 - Lockers
I think that we'll see a couple of new players, and, contrary to the prevailing opinion, I would rather see a very good 7 and 1, as I would back our young forwards to carry on improving.
With no Hock, Bailey or Smith from this year, we ought to have a bit of money to spend, even with Gleeson and improved terms for Sam T and other young uns.
Give us a new coach, and we'll be flying. We'd be top 3 this year but for poor conditioning.

Exiled Wiganer wrote:Well, I would like to see...
1 - Phelps (he is really coming on, and showing why he was an Aussie junior rep player)
2 - Ainscough (if only Amos' wife allowed him to follow the Barrett path of legging it early)
3 - Gleeson
4 - Carmont
5 - Richards
6 - Sam T
7 - new player (Brough?)
8 - Prescott (Fielden doesn't merit a starting number)
9 - McIllorum (ditto Piggy)
10 - Coley (ditto Feca)
11 - Hansen (has stepped up in Hock's absence, I am beginning to see why DaveO rates him)
12 - Joel T
13 - Lockers
I think that we'll see a couple of new players, and, contrary to the prevailing opinion, I would rather see a very good 7 and 1, as I would back our young forwards to carry on improving.
With no Hock, Bailey or Smith from this year, we ought to have a bit of money to spend, even with Gleeson and improved terms for Sam T and other young uns.
Give us a new coach, and we'll be flying. We'd be top 3 this year but for poor conditioning.

I was agreeing with you till I saw you had no place for Tommy!

I agee with you about tommy not being in the starting line up but can you imagine how good he would be coming off the bench??? i think he would run a good team ragged coming on after 25 mins at dummy half!!!

Exiled Wiganer wrote:Well, I would like to see...
1 - Phelps (he is really coming on, and showing why he was an Aussie junior rep player)
2 - Ainscough (if only Amos' wife allowed him to follow the Barrett path of legging it early)
3 - Gleeson
4 - Carmont
5 - Richards
6 - Sam T
7 - new player (Brough?)
8 - Prescott (Fielden doesn't merit a starting number)
9 - McIllorum (ditto Piggy)
10 - Coley (ditto Feca)
11 - Hansen (has stepped up in Hock's absence, I am beginning to see why DaveO rates him)
12 - Joel T
13 - Lockers
I think that we'll see a couple of new players, and, contrary to the prevailing opinion, I would rather see a very good 7 and 1, as I would back our young forwards to carry on improving.

I don't think we are signing anybody so I think TL will be at 7 again though that isn't ideal. As to the forwards I think the main reason why people want a new prop is because Fielden is a shadow of the player he once was and isn't doing the type of job we need which is that of a Morely or Pongia type of player.

If we stay as we are in the front row we will still struggle IMO in big games.

The snag is if we did get a new prop and Nobby is still coach (as I suspect he will be for one more season) it wouldn't be Fielden who got dropped.

With no Hock, Bailey or Smith from this year, we ought to have a bit of money to spend, even with Gleeson and improved terms for Sam T and other young uns.
Give us a new coach, and we'll be flying. We'd be top 3 this year but for poor conditioning.

I get the impression the money including Hock's has gone on Gleeson's improved terms for 2010 and improving contracts.

Smith wasn't supposed to be on a great deal of money and Bailey is the only out of contract player who's future is yet to be decided. Even if he leaves I don't think he was on the mega bucks some people may assume.

Upgrading four junior players wages would easily eat up Hock's wage and so I don't think there is as much free cash to play with as you might think.

Dave

I might be missing the point here but of Hock's wages are going to cover Gleeson's salary then what would have happened in 2010 if Hock has still been here - would we have been over the cap - or was the plan to let Bailey go and now Hock has gone we can keep Bailey.

Couple of other suggests - is there no way Fielden can play second row?
Could we not sign a prop on a similar deal to Gleeson - three year deal - heavily loaded to pay him in the later two years of his contract - ie when Fielden has gone.

I also am thinking Bailey on a 1 year deal for 2010 then Hock back in 2011