: Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:14 pm  

If we dont sign anyone for next season, how can anyone state the club won't have gone backwards in terms of a playing squad for 2010?

Bailey is the player all the youngsters look up to and Hock is the best second row in the competition.

Cruncher wrote:

It certainly gets exhausting, the bitterness and vitriol with which some fans speak about the club and the way it's run.

Certainly not me, I have no axe to grind with IL long term, it just astounds me that Noble, Maurice, Players etc will all get flack but people are so keen to just accept what IL says. He hasnt imo given an acceptable reason for no signings for 2010.

That combined for the Noble issue would have caused this place to explode if Maurice/Whelan were still in place.

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 2:43 pm  

AJ wrote:

If we dont sign anyone for next season, how can anyone state the club won't have gone backwards in terms of a playing squad for 2010?

Bailey is the player all the youngsters look up to and Hock is the best second row in the competition.



Certainly not me, I have no axe to grind with IL long term, it just astounds me that Noble, Maurice, Players etc will all get flack but people are so keen to just accept what IL says. He hasnt imo given an acceptable reason for no signings for 2010.

That combined for the Noble issue would have caused this place to explode if Maurice/Whelan were still in place.

[DaveO]

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:23 pm  

SiY wrote:

I think IL is biding his time. His hands or going to be tied somewhat with signings he didn't make on wages he probably wouldn't have given out.

With the cap space he's had i think he's done a good job so far. Yes he's not brought in any WORLD CLASS players but what he has brought in has not been any worse than what we already had.. So in that respect we've not gone backwards.

I think it wont be until the end of next season until he'll have a lot of cap space to play around with until we'll see him really move in for some decent players. So the signings he's made have either been to improve the squad (Gleeson) or to maybe to take a risk on a new player (Phelps) if he knew he couldn't buy any top quality player for a few years, it would seem the perfect time to take a risk on certain players. Phelps seems to be turning out to be ok.

IL's hands are tied by the signings he DID make. Last season he signed Piggy and |Roberts on long term deals (and getting Roberts a year ealry was definitely an IL decision). This season Coley, TL, Phelps, Smith and Bailey (not sure about Carmont) are/were all off contract but most got re-signed.

If changes in playing staff were needed the only money you get free'd up is that coming from players off contract who you do not re-sign. So by re-signing the likes of Coley and TL what IL has done is eat up any money that was due to become free.

So it's not just big contracts previously agreed before he got here that is using up all the salary cap money but signings he has made including re-signing the players out of contract this year.

Now you may say it was obvious TL warranted a new deal but there is always plenty of debate over if he is good enough. An option was to let him go and use his wages to try and go for a better 7 but IL has chosen not to.

When discussing Roberts or Piggy the argument often put forward is they are better then what was here before. OK then, would Tronc or similar not be better than Coley? IL has chosen to stick with Coley.

So the point I am making is with the number of players out of contract added to Hock's wage being available, there was plenty of scope to change the side around but IL has chosen not to do so and therefore it is not because his hands were tied that we have the team we have but rather because he chose for us to have this team in 2010.

Dave

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:24 pm  

AJ wrote:

If we dont sign anyone for next season, how can anyone state the club won't have gone backwards in terms of a playing squad for 2010?

Bailey is the player all the youngsters look up to and Hock is the best second row in the competition.



Certainly not me, I have no axe to grind with IL long term, it just astounds me that Noble, Maurice, Players etc will all get flack but people are so keen to just accept what IL says. He hasnt imo given an acceptable reason for no signings for 2010.

That combined for the Noble issue would have caused this place to explode if Maurice/Whelan were still in place.

Personally i think we will be stronger next season than this even without any new faces purely down to how well some of the younger players have stepped up this season (although whether we would be strong enough to break the top two stranglehold is up for debate). Maybe we don't need to bring many/any in apart from maybe at prop although we still have 5 of those.

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:33 pm  

DaveO wrote:

IL's hands are tied by the signings he DID make. Last season he signed Piggy and |Roberts on long term deals (and getting Roberts a year ealry was definitely an IL decision). This season Coley, TL, Phelps, Smith and Bailey (not sure about Carmont) are/were all off contract but most got re-signed.

If changes in playing staff were needed the only money you get free'd up is that coming from players off contract who you do not re-sign. So by re-signing the likes of Coley and TL what IL has done is eat up any money that was due to become free.

So it's not just big contracts previously agreed before he got here that is using up all the salary cap money but signings he has made including re-signing the players out of contract this year.

Now you may say it was obvious TL warranted a new deal but there is always plenty of debate over if he is good enough. An option was to let him go and use his wages to try and go for a better 7 but IL has chosen not to.

When discussing Roberts or Piggy the argument often put forward is they are better then what was here before. OK then, would Tronc or similar not be better than Coley? IL has chosen to stick with Coley.

So the point I am making is with the number of players out of contract added to Hock's wage being available, there was plenty of scope to change the side around but IL has chosen not to do so and therefore it is not because his hands were tied that we have the team we have but rather because he chose for us to have this team in 2010.

Dave

I agree.

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:53 pm  

DaveO wrote:

IL's hands are tied by the signings he DID make.

Dave

bang on - the time has passed to blame previous admins - remember way back at deanery il and joe lydon did a lot of 'give us 2 years' talk, and 'we are top heavy salary wise' but we will sort it out. if we are in a mess salary wise then it seems unacceptable to me. since deanery think of the high earners who've left or will be doing by this off season.

barrett
bailey
higham
hock
calderwood
tim smith

alone should be a hell of a wedge. prob more names to add to it but really where has the cash gone? surely improving the wages of the current squad doesnt equal out to the money you can only speculate that lot earnt between them.

someone told me the other day that bailey earns more than fielden - if this is truje then we are talking a mega wedge.

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:01 pm  

pk wrote:

bang on - the time has passed to blame previous admins - remember way back at deanery il and joe lydon did a lot of 'give us 2 years' talk, and 'we are top heavy salary wise' but we will sort it out. if we are in a mess salary wise then it seems unacceptable to me. since deanery think of the high earners who've left or will be doing by this off season.

barrett
bailey
higham
hock
calderwood
tim smith

alone should be a hell of a wedge. prob more names to add to it but really where has the cash gone? surely improving the wages of the current squad doesnt equal out to the money you can only speculate that lot earnt between them.

someone told me the other day that bailey earns more than fielden - if this is truje then we are talking a mega wedge.

If that's true, it rather contradicts what you said about the time having passed to blame the previous admin.

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:06 pm  

I think that we are being a little too pessimistic here. Our stand out loss is Hock , one of our few "World Class" players, but our record without him has been better than when he was playing earlier in the season. It has allowed our younger players to take up the cudgel, and I think they have done it really well.

Now if the likes of Prescott, Joel Tomkins, Hanson, Mcillorum and Mossop can continue to improve next year I don't think the loss of Hock will hit us too hard, apart from a little less depth in the squad. I have been impressed with how these players have responded this season and have no reason to suspect they will not continue to improve. They are not far short of very good Super League players now and could all go up another notch. Not sure what to think about O'Carroll, a pity about his injury, but he is a useful performer now with plenty of potential in him.

"Experienced" packmen like Feka, Fielden and and Riddell are not to old to improve, or arrest the decline in Fielden's case, and I think it is only a case of the right conditioning for all three of them which could sort them out. Coley IMO is at his peak but should be able to stay there for next season.

The likes of Davies and Farrall will hopefully also be introduced and although I don't expect great things from them they will benefit just as Prescott, Joel, etc have done previously and may even develop quicker.

I know there are plenty of ifs and buts in there but if you look at it in a positive rather than negative way, we could end up with a storming pack next year, without the steamrolling prop everyone says we need.

I think most people agree that the backs are as good as we've had for a few years now. Sam, Tommy and Phelps will continue to improve. Richards, Carmont, Roberts and Gleeson are as good as they are going to get but hopefully the Roberts/Gleeson combination will gel better than it has to date and that Carmont has at least another season in him. To back this up we have the likes of Goulding, Ainscough and Thornley.

I am not as worried about the lack of a new prop as I am about depth for the backs. Injury to either Tommy or Sam will leave us horribly exposed at half back with no obvious replacement unless there is someone in the reserves who is ready to step up. I think we are also a little light in backup for the threequarters and full back. Is this where Bailey will prove to be more useful than in the pack as a stop gap until we can get better?

So what I'm trying to say is that with further development in the young forwards and a kick up the backside for some of the older ones we will have a pack to match the best in the league and with our existing backline we may just surprise a few people.

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:42 pm  

thepriestman85 wrote:

But that’s not strictly true now is it?

Yes I agree the recruitment for next season isn’t what i’d either want or expected but IL has done other good things with some of the wages you mentioned above.

Just to refresh your memory he’s signed up the most talented young player in SL to a FIVE year deal as well as resigning the current in form FB as well. Even a staunch IL critic like yourself has to admit he’s done well here.

Yes I would love us to sign a top class player (prop) and I agree it’s frustrating watching the likes of Pauleta, Carvell & Tronc going to other teams while players like Lynch, Price & Petro stay at their current clubs but it’s not all doom and gloom.

And what if he signed up S.Tomkins and Phelps?

Any chairman with an ounce of common sense would extend their deals! I have to agree with AJ.

If we don't sign anyone, prepare for ANOTHER long dismal season in 2010.

: Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:50 pm  

cadoo wrote:

A poster on the other forum has quoted Ian Lenagan saying to him he wants instant success at Wigan. Is this pathetic as well?

My sole issue with Ian Lenagan currently is the way he has dealt with the prop forward situation. We have needed to strengthen in this area for the last two years and we have failed to do so. We've missed Carl Webb - not all IL's fault but I do not see why we could not have had a back up plan should the inevitable happen and him not get a visa?

I am irritated when we keep missing out on players and clubs keep on strengthening. Wakefield Wildcats signing Tronc and Hull FC signing Mark O'Meley. Jason Ryles moving to Les Catalans last year and Gareth Carvell moving to Warrington. We continue to miss out on that one signing that will make a massive difference to this team. We're not far off being a very class outfit but we are constantly let down each year by the inadequate recruitment to bring in a top draw prop. Each season we are told next year, next year, next year. When do we draw a line to this and say - right that is it let's get us a top prop forward that we so desperately need!

I don't want mass amount of signings each year and I agree with some points other posters make about patience and build your side around your young players but we need to recognise that this can't be done without the class and experience of top players to help the young lads along. Leeds have it with Danny Buderus, Brent Webb, Ali Lauititi etc and Saints have them with Tony Puletua, Matt Gidley etc


So if by being disappointed in having another season without the prop forward we need and the loss of Gareth Hock and (possibly) Phil Bailey and not replacing them taking us backwards means I am being unfair to Ian Lenagan and impatient - then I apologise.

It is the 'next year, next year, next year' that most Wigan fans (myself included) really are getting frustrated, annoyed and to be frank impatient with.

If we don't sign anyone then fine so be it, but don't IL and BN (or whoever is coach) try to big 2010 up for us fans for yet another failure season.