9 games into this season so far and not many would argue our halfbacks have been instrumental in our success so far. So far Gidley has featured in all but two games and Sandow has been ever-present (excluding the majority of Wigan away). Interestingly in our two games without Gidley we conceded 26 and 30 points, while we've only conceded an average of 13 points per game while he was on the pitch. Admittedly it's a small sample but it's a striking statistic nonetheless. That being said, we don't seem to struggle scoring without him - Sandow has very much led the way on that front.

Now Sandow is facing a spell on the sidelines, will his absence prove as significant as when Gidley isn't playing? Will we struggle to score points without Sandow the way we seem to struggle to organise our defence without Gidley? Who has been the bigger influence on our successful performances?

Mad thing is i was going to post an almost identical topic, figured I'd wait till after Saints and structure it slightly different...but yes I've thought the same.
Who actually is the more important?
Personally at the moment I'm not sure, but Friday will be a good indication.

Gids sures up defence that is for sure, but Sandow is our main attacking threat.

Both players give the other lads confidence which is a big ingredient for success, Gidley because of his level head, tactical knowhow and general leadership and Sandow because you know, as long as you're in the game, he has the ability to get you the win.

My feeling is that we will be just as hard to beat with either in the team. I'd be a bit worried if Gidley went off in Friday though!

I think they are ying and yang.

Sandow makes extravagant outrageous passes; long looping balls, kicks to the wingman. Gidley makes short incisive passes, but just as deadly.

Sandow's goal kicking is hit and miss, Gidley is metronomically accurate.

Sandow has fantastic acceleration, Gidley is .... well, a bit more measured as befits an elderly statesman.

Sandy is the showman, Gidley the puppeteer.

With Sandow you see exactly what you are getting on the pitch. But Gidley is like the proverbial iceberg, which brings me to the point I really wanted to make. When Briers is at an U19 match he constantly sends message to the team via pitch side staff. "Tell Livett to move 5 yards down the goal line". " Kilgannon should be in the front defensive line, not 5 yards back". " Watch out for the short kick off". He would love to be on the pitch, constantly coaching and talking to his charges. But I am pretty certain that is exactly what Gidley is doing. He is constantly talking to the players around him, organising defensive positions, spotting the gaps that shouldn't be there, warning of likely moves from the opposition. He has a huge amount of experience at the highest level, and he is using that not just to gain a win, but to improve the individuals in the team. LOL, he is conducting a coaching session during game time.

So if Gidley should suddenly get crocked our defence could be as shocking as last year ?
Hopefully,we have learned how to improve our defence from last year & hopefully there is still a plan to win without Sandow on the pitch. The proof of the pudding will be in the next couple of months.

Agree with all the points, Sandow is often his own man yet he and Gidley compliment one another causing problems on two fronts for the opposition they now have only Gidley to contend with, Ratchford did well after Sandow departed he has a cavalier style with a good work rate but would Patton be a better option at seven playing his own game, he has some pace and creativity I think he would work well with Gidley.

The organisation of Gidley allows Sandow to do what he does best. Sandow has got most of the media attention so far as what he has been doing is very eye catching, for me in terms of entertainment he really is worth the entry fee alone. It'll be interesting to see how ratchford plays next to Gidley in the coming matches. I don't think comparing him to Sandow is very fair but Ratchford is a very good player in his own right and I think he will go well next to Gidley. In general I think Sandow is the most important to the spectacle of rugby league (and our points tally) and Gidley is more important to the team. I'm delighted that we have both of them to be honest.

I think it's right that these 2 are getting a lot of the plaudits (Sandow has scored or assisted half of our tries this season) but to be fair to the rest of the team everyone has stepped up (not so much Hill and Currie who were excellent last year as well) which is clearly making it easier for those guys to control the game. I don't think anybody epitomises the difference in application this season more than Atkins who in all honesty before the new squad was put together had for the past couple of seasons been a shadow of his former self. Can't fault him this year so far.

I would like to see Patton given another chance at seven but my head tells me Smith will go with Ratchford as he did well with Gidley, as CW8 says Ratchford is a very good player if as suspected he gets the shirt would that mean Clark doing eighty again? whoever gets to play seven while having Gidley alongside him he has to have the confidence take on defences as Sandow did, he created so much room putting teams on the back foot, obvious but Sts will be more than pleased he's not playing.

Stats can mean anything you want them too. What your not factoring in is that the lower stat was against what is considered poorer opposition in the league whilst the higher stat was the result against top opposition. Not that I'm saying Gidley doesn't have an influence but there is an alternative reason.

I don't really get your point. The 7 teams we played with Gidley score an average of 22.5 per game. We conceded an average of 13.1 against them. The 2 teams we played without Gidley score an average of 24.8 per game. We conceded and average of 28 against them. I said it was a small sample but the numbers are meaningful. Teams have scored 10 points less against us than they usually do while Gidley is on the pitch. The two occasions he hasn't been, teams have scored more than they usually do.

Sorry I thought I'd made my point clear.

When Gidley played it was against opposition that can be considered as easy teams to beat.
When he was missing it was against more formidable opposition.
Thus it is fair to say the quality of teams may have had a bearing over the results beyond that of Gidley's inclusion.

Leeds were more or less full strength when we played them, we are the only team to not play a depleted Leeds.
Wigan are 2nd
Widnes were top.

He missed Salford and Hull, one a narrow win in the last second the other a loss.

wtf are you on about?

I take both your points. I still think there are other factions inclusive other than that of just Gidley.
Salford were in the form of their lives before losing their 6 Sio or something? Hull had just come into the form of their lives.

As an outsider looking in from sunny Widnes, from what I have seen, Gidley seems to have the bigger influence over your team.

He provides the calming influence and steers you around the pitch effortlessly, setting up the positions for Sandow to do his stuff.

Also, as somebody else has already said, he organises your defence really well.

When we meet again in a couple of weeks, I would prefer to face you without Gidley rather than it being Sandow that looks like he might be missing, not that I wish ill on any player.

Looking forward to the rematch.

I think there is more influencing at Widnes than mere players.