I agree with what you say if (and I am glad we did not get asked ) after the drubbing at wembley Rovers were asked I bet we would not turn it down full house would be great the beating would not be

In the summer of 1987 Maurice Lindsay boarded a plane to Sydney and persuaded Manly to travel across for the World Club Challenge. Wigan's average was just over 13k, Lindsay had to ensure Manly's expenses were covered, sort out a trophy and arrange a big sponsor (Fosters) to pay out a substancial prize fund. He also sorted out Channel Nine in Australia to beam back live to Australia.

This wasn't a RFL event it was a Wigan event. Lindsay took a massive risk but reaped the rewards with a 37,500 gate.

If Davy wants to feast at the kings table they need to act like a big club and take the odd risk rather than wait for someone to hand it to them.

Sort of agree. I suppose a few things will go through Ken's head when making a decision to put the money into it.

1. Will it increase our fan base?
2. Will it help with our big game mentality?
3. Will he or even the club profit from it?

There's no evidence to suggest that any of these would be answered YES.

Obviously as us fans see it, it's disappointing. We feel the club should be rewarded. If we'd of got the league leaders or got to a final we probably would of been picked and would of been able to afford it.
We need to do better in 2016 and give the RFL no choice.

but as i've said Steve, we didn't meet the criteria this time to play in the WCS so not sure how that can be the club not stepping up.
im pretty sure the club, and the fans, want to step up but it hasn't happened yet because we aren't good enough yet, there are 9 other clubs i'm sure would want to step up to where we are but it has to be earned and we haven't done that ..yet!

Couldn't agree more.A great opportunity on a silver platter.

if the giants were to host a game, to just break even, not to make any profit, but just to get the bond money back, we would be looking at a minimum gate of 15 or 16,000, now considering Huddersfield have only had 1 attendance over 15,000 in over 40 years, does anyone really believe that we could suddenly pull in that sort of crowd for a glorified friendly?
we had our biggest home game for a generation 2 weeks ago and there were less than 7,000 home supporters there, when we won the LLS there was only 8,000 there.
it would take a massive effort, probably well out of our reach to do that.
that money £180k would be better off spent on our playing or coaching staff or our facilities.

hopefully as SL champions next year we will take on the challenge

even in 1987, wigan were a big name in the sport and as they were averaging 13k that is still twice as much as what we can realistically attract on a regular basis, so again, comparing Wigan to Huddersfield is baffling

I said I wanted Huddersfield to be the third team due to the fairness of league position but I do understand why Saints have been chosen; the attendance will be a lot better at Saints, more money will be made, game will probably be more competitive and it would be a better game in terms of exposure and growing the series of course, which is the most important thing here I think.

i would say yes, but i don't make decisions.

at the moment i don't think the club can justify spending, what little money we have available, on nothing more than a friendly, athough a very prestigious friendly, if it was a WCC on the line it would be different.

The Leeds Rhinos v the North Queensland Cowboys is going to be 100% excitement after this years grand finals.

The most one-sided game will be Sydney Roosters vs St. Helens. The Sydney Roosters will hammer St Helens, but they would have hammered Huddersfield just as badly. Nevertheless the thrashing to be meted out will create a bad feeling in the stomachs of all English viewers bar Wigan fans.

BOOKMARKED!!!!!!!!!!!!

Screenshot SAVED!!!!!

Still for me the Giants blow hot and cold.
When they are good they are very good. When they are bad they are awful