Higham's form astounded me whenever I saw him this year, I agree that on this season alone, he's the outstanding performer at 9.
Obviously his performances over his career have influenced people's opinion. Rightly or wrongly.

It's a completely moot argument, comparing McIlorum to Houghton in this thread, as one is in the England squad and the other isn't, and this is about selection for this weekend. Houghton is a very good player who makes a lot of carries, meters and tackles. If you look at his stats they read very impressively, but what you often see when you have a hooker like that is the rest of the team's stats read less impressively, it's been the same at Saints with Roby for a number of seasons now. McIlorum is more of an all round hooker who's main job is distribution to his halves, he will scoot occassionally but nowhere near as much as Roby, Burrow, Houghton, Higham etc. You look at players like Cam Smith and Robbie Farah, neither of them are likely to have 1 or 2 scoots on every set of 6, is Higham better than those as well?

FWIW I named a team for the semi and didn't include McIlorum in it, I'd rather Roby played for 80 minutes. I'm not really a fan of using an interchange hooker unless you have 2 complimentary styles (i.e. a tough tackling distributor and a scooter), hence why I think McNamara has looked at using Roby and McIlorum, but I don't think there's any need as Roby is a bit of a freak who can has both of these strengths in his game anyway.

I've got no problem at all with people underrating Wigan players, but McIlorum has been Wigan's no. 1 hooker for 4 seasons now, either playing 80 minutes or being spelled with Riddell, Leuluai or Logan Tomkins, and we've won 6 trophies in that time. People seem to be suggesting that this is in spite of McIlorum rather than him contributing to that in any way. Sorry to detract from the thread a bit but there was some utter nonsense being spouted.

With regards to Darryl Clark, I was a bit surprised he never got a run out for the Knights against Samoa. Then again I was a bit confused with a few selections in that game tbh, a 30 year old Cockayne playing in what is supposed to be a development squad in favour of players like Broughton, Jones-Bishop, Lineham and McGillvary was another puzzler.

That is not as daft as it may seem by any means and you have highlighted another player player who is at least as good as McIlorum. There are in fact a number of options behind Roby who you can make a case for, Lunt, Higham, Houghton, Clark, even though it pains me as a Hull fan to say it, Josh Hodgson and have data to support them beyond "he's our 3rd most important player in a champion side". Burrow is something of a special case as he has a style and role all of his own but if we are after more "classical" no 9's then there are many decent players to choose from. Mind you supporters of these other players tend to acknowledge Roby as the undoubted best, which he is, with the curious exception of some members of the McIlorum fan club who seem to operate a different set of measurements and even spout the deluded fantasy that he is somehow better than Roby.

I would also suggest that most opponents most certainly do not see McIlorum as the 3rd most important Wigan player and one to fear - Tompkins obviously, O'Loughlin yes, but then it would be Smith and Green, Charnley and Richards for starters. That is without considering the physical efforts of the rest of the Wigan pack which usually outmuscles its opponents Farrell, Mossop and Hansen for example rank higher amongst their contemporaries in their position than McIlorum and give him more space and time than most to operate in. And he still doesn't stand out.

Wane is hardly going to come out and admit that there are better players out there. He is as biased as they come.

This is getting embarrassing now.

Mcillorum is just not as good as Wigan fans think.
Everyone can see it apart from them.
He's also not shown anything to prove his hard man reputation.
And yes I saw that him standing in the French players leg.
That proves the exact opposite of being tough and hard.

At least we all agree he shouldn't play this weekend.

And yes, Higham was outstanding this year and should have been in the squad but maybe too similar to roby.

McIlorum will be in the 17 no doubt, but he's not fit to lace Isaac Luke's boots.

People who claim Burrow is too small appear to be forgetting that the last time NZ toured over here Burrow was the man of series.

3 different coaches have continued to pick Ian Kirke to 5 GF winning rings. That's probably more of a testament, but I wouldn't have picked him in any of those teams. Or in the England team.

All SL squads have to make compromises due to the salary cap. If there was no salary cap I'm not sure McIlorum would be the starting hooker at Wigan.

I bet he would swap him in an instant though if he had a chance of having Roby. Nobody in their right mind would take McIllorum over Roby in a straight option deal.

And this New Zeland side is far bigger, stronger, and much superior to the injury ravaged side that toured back then.

Burrow is a few years older, and a more known quantity, which makes him easier to handle than back then.

McIlorum played against Lunt in the play offs and played the 80 mins. Lunt was off the field from 15 mins to 65th minute. Hudds pack were overpowered and out played.
Against Leeds in the play off game McIlorum played the 80. Burrow who played at 9 and the Leeds pack were over powered and out played.
Grand Final, Wire played Monaghan and Higham against McIlorum who played the 80 mins. The Wire 9s were anonymous and McIlorum was in consideration for MOM.
It is obvious that McIlorum fits very well into Wigan's well structured and disciplined game plan with Green/Smith at first receiver. He obviously doesn't fit so well into McNamara's shambles of a team.
McIlorum will be in the England set up long after McNamara has gone.

Another buffoon who believes that just because a team won it therefore means that each individual outplayed their opposite number.

I'm surprised you didn't mention the 2010 Grand Final when McIlorum "owned" Roby.

Wigan fans really are a different breed.

GF that Wigan were so dominate in, Wire winning first half, and had the most unfortunate list of injuries in that first half that they simply couldn't carry into the next 40 minutes.

Besides if a player say, received MoM in all 27 rounds and then had a bad playoff, would that mean he was garbage?

Should we have had Goulding, Thornley and Smith in the team because they played in GF winning side?

If Dudson had received MoM should we look to stealing him off Wales to replace one of the Burgess lads?

Yed, I think you have hit the nail on the head. There's quite a few very, very good but not truly outstanding players there but add them together and work to their strengths as well as a controlled game plan and you have an excellent Wigan side. Played to the strength of the sum of the parts within and they dominated the game last year with all the silverware.

FWIW I agree with the Wigan poster that McNamara has a big part in this. He hasn't got the best out of the players as his plan is what he has come up with and they can't adapt to it in which case McNamara needs to look at what he has got and evolve the team to get the best out of the sum of the parts (doesn't help having no true half backs though and whilst I admire Sinfield greatly I don't believe for a minute he is an international class half back and the less said about the random hothead lunatic at six the better).