Is that because Bridge is a better player than Gleeson or a certain coach who obviously had something against Gleeson?

Gleeson > Bridge

Gleeson was > Bridge, times change.

Lee Mossop signs a new 5 year deal

Well played Wigan.
It would be nice to see more English players in the NRL but we don't want an exodus.

And is still > Bridge.

Gleeson has been average for some time, hence not getting picked for England and Warrington getting rid of him to sign Atkins. Indeed Gleeson was very lucky to be around at a time when there wasnt any English centres to choose from. It was a very good bit of business by Warrington, replacing one has been with an up and coming young player with bags of potential. I know many Wigan fans who have been very disappointed by Gleeson and say he has been fairly average since he was signed.

Carmont although good in attack is woeful in defence. He is a fairly average import which has been typical of the English game over the last couple of decades. Newcastle fans couldnt wait for him to leave as he simply wasnt good enough for them. He is not a patch on some of the top centres to play in Super League and shouldnt even be mentioned in the same breath as someone like Gidley.

I thought they got rid of him to sign Mathers?

Very poor attempt at trolling there.

D- must try harder

I like Carmont, he's been a very astute purchase - granted he's no Gidley or Lyon, but then again he's not on Gidley/Lyon money.

Been one of our best signings for a while. Brought us some stability in the centres that we hadn't had for a while.

Agreed. If you stood Carmont and Gidley side by side and got someone (not familiar with the British game) and showed them player highlights from their time spent in SL, then informed them that one is on *£150k a Season and one is on *£40k a season - would the person tell who was on the most salary? Possibly,..... probably even. But I bet they would say there wasn't three/four times more quality consistent with the difference in money.

[size*Educated guess for arguments sake.[/size

So you reckon Carmont is only on 40k?

Only a Wigan fan would try and compare Gidley and Carmont as players. There simply is no comparison, Gidley wins hands down in every department.

Also there is no way that Gidley is on nearly 4 times what Carmont is. Carmont has had his contract renewed/renegotiated a couple of times since he came. If that is the case and he is still only on 40k then he should get a new agent. He may have been fairly cheap when he came (still would have been far more than 40k though!) but he would still have been on decent enough money seeing as many young fringe first teamers get more than 40k. It also certainly does not mean that he is still cheap now. Wigan fans always use this value for money argument when talking about him but it simply does not exist now. If you are plucking figures out of thin air if he was now on 100k+ a year he would hardly still be good value for money, he would simply be getting the going rate.

Dont forget Wigan fans have been telling everyone how good he is and that loads of clubs wanted to sign him when his contract was running out but now you are saying he stayed for 40k. This means that either no clubs wanted him, they didnt want him enough to pay much more than 40k or he is on far more than Wigan fans try and make out. So which one is it?