Leeds. Wigan had first option but passed on it - says it all.

Wigan are up to their cap but would have took him back.

Rather have Mossop from the riddlers at the bottom of the garden

Not sure why so much hate for Mossop as he was a very good prospect as a young prop unfortunately he was one of Wigan's robots and played far too much Super League rugby for a front rower of his age. When he arrived at Parramatta they sent him straight for an operation on his shoulders that they reckoned he should of had 12 months previously.

Wigan just replaced him with another robot prop from their academy that will no doubt joined the list of Mossopp, Prescott, Tuson and others whose careers are pretty much done and dusted by their mid-twenties when as props they should be coming into their prime.

Clubs should have a duty of care to their players with consideration to longevity of career, I feel Mossop was let down in this area.

Absolutely bob on! Mossop is not a bad player at all and will be an asset for whichever club he signs for

I don't think it is a question of hate, merely questioning the signing of a player who can't last the course of a season with a recurring injury.

Regarding your duty of care comment; compare and contrast Mike Cooper.....

i think he would be a decent signing if he stays fit.

i wouldnt complain if we brought him in

It's a backrower we're short of, unless we are playing Sim in the 2nd row on occasions?

A fit Lee Mossop is a valuable asset, I fear his shoulders are shot though.

Well he was a direct replacement for waterhouse.

This is an instance of someone having an irrational theory and then casting around for evidence to support it.

Mossop didn't have the op so that he could play in the world cup, nothing to do with Wigan. Chris Tuson never played prop. Paul Prescot would fit the theory as he was 26 when he finished - Who are the mysterious others?