WiganWarriorsFans.com

DaveO wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:11 pm FFS. As has just been pointed out on the Warrington thread he made more meters in five minutes than Powell did in 75. Yet Powell gets two more years.

Powell's guardian angel is back at the club, He ain't going nowhere as long as Waney is here, Jobs for the boys is here to stay

Caboosegg wrote:Alot of over reaction on here, we knew cuts are inbound, you can't plan to have a big team with only 5k fans through the gates

Wigan star Its a wigan prospect and I imagine people would not blink twice if we had been playing well this season.

I

And if I had a million pounds i’d be a millionaire. It’s no use saying if things had been different they would be! We haven’t been playing well so people look for reasons why.

It’s not illogical to be frustrated one of the reasons we haven’t been playing well, zero attacking contributions from Powell, sees him rewarded with a new deal. Then when one of two young hookers who could in theory form a good partnership sharing the role is let go it’s bang your head against the desk time.

It just reinforced people’s views that whoever is managing the squad is clueless. We’d lose nothing if Powell was let go. In fact if money is the issue we’d probably save some. As someone else said if it proved too much for the young hookers then do something about it then.

Wiganer Ted wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:25 pm
Lam has named three hookers in his squad for Leigh

And where is the logic in that? If you're going to rest Powell (or even drop him), then do so. if Powell is going to play any minutes at all, you don't need two replacements, and you've wasted a bench spot.

moto748 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:46 pm

Wiganer Ted wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:25 pm
Lam has named three hookers in his squad for Leigh

And where is the logic in that? If you're going to rest Powell (or even drop him), then do so. if Powell is going to play any minutes at all, you don't need two replacements, and you've wasted a bench spot.

I'm sure it was Nathan who pointed out Wigan under Lam do not use the inter change hooker option. When we have one on the bench it is purely to fill the bench not because Lam wants to inter-change Powell for any reason. Picking two hookers with Powell in the squad means selections are being made on numbers rather than tactics

moto748 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:46 pm

Wiganer Ted wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:25 pm
Lam has named three hookers in his squad for Leigh

And where is the logic in that? If you're going to rest Powell (or even drop him), then do so. if Powell is going to play any minutes at all, you don't need two replacements, and you've wasted a bench spot.

It's the 21 man squad.

moto748 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:46 pm

Wiganer Ted wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:25 pm
Lam has named three hookers in his squad for Leigh

And where is the logic in that? If you're going to rest Powell (or even drop him), then do so. if Powell is going to play any minutes at all, you don't need two replacements, and you've wasted a bench spot.

Powell was injured on Wednesday.

Can someone tell me why no-one will ever replace Powell at Hooker until he retires,

And when he retires he will no doubt join the coaching staff

So some fans want to get rid of the games top tackle maker?

I'll bet the same fans would like to sign Brad Dwyer, who has missed more tackles than any other player!!

Brad Dwyer yes please didn’t miss Powell against Huddersfield. At least we would be more dangerous in our opponents 25. Leeds seem to cope with Dwyer in defence why not Wigan. He changed the game against Hull. I would rather be entertained than bored to death.