It depends how you play.

Teams play differently. Coaches have different philosophies.

It may not be what “YOU” want but it is something Peet wants.

Wigan rely on outside backs and centres to make metres.

Just because 1 team plays one way it doesn’t mean all teams do.

Gelling was consistently Wigan’s biggest meter maker during his time with us. Was he during his time for Wire?

At Wigan probably since the days of Wane our backs make metres, along with Faz who is a freak, and the rest of the pack are generally there to defend and set up field position.

Also Renouf was a big metre maker, without doubt a strike centre as opposed to a creative player. If you don’t understand that then I would question your understanding of rugby.

Lyon was more your classic “centre” though I will give you that.

I’d say though the Wigan philosophy has been more successful than the Warrington philosophy since Wane implemented it as the trophy cabinets would prove.

Renouf made his metres going 50/60 yards to score tries to be fair to him!

Yeah, Miski is really effective in the Wigan system.

How come he rarely gets selected to play then?

Maybe Peet isn`t as obsessed with statistics as you obviously are.

A big meter maker, beats a small meter maker every time.

Peet has been trying to accommodate Field, French and Cust in the same team.

It hasn’t worked.

Even prior to Cust’s injury French was being moved to 1 and Field to 6 in games.

It’s not about statistics, it’s about what works.

French is significantly more effective at 1 than he is at 1 as both Saints and you guys found out.

French is effective at 6 and provides strike to compliment Smiths direction.

Miski and Marshall get the sets started quicker than French does as he needs a bit of space to do what he does he lacks the physicality of the other wingers.

Cust isn’t a bad player, he is just too similar to Smith and the 2 try to organise us…it doesn’t work.

I do find the comment about stats an interesting one though which I would like you to explain.

All coaches are obsessed with stats. Their week tends to be dominated by them.

In the vast majority of games teams who win the stats win the game (not always but generally).


Can you elaborate on your lack of interest with stats and why you think Powell isn’t interested in them?

I don’t think that anyone is obsessed with statistics, the comment was that Warrington struggled to get out of their own half but Wigan didn’t and our three quarters had a big part to play in that.

Because Peet was trying to accommodate Field at full back after his exploits last season (fair call) which meant French on the wing. Miski wasn't getting in ahead of French or Marshall and, to be fair, neither would either of your wingers. Since French went to fullback he's played every game.

You know, with the amount of quality coaches on these forums it's a wonder that Powell et al manage to get jobs at all!

I was replying to your comment that" French isn`t nearly as effective on the wing as Miski"

French has just signed a lucrative new contract to play for Wigan when it looked as though he would return to the NRL.

Wigan bust a gut to retain him and with Field playing fullback, French would have to be accommodated on the wing.

If Miski is a better winger then Wigan could have saved a massive amount of Salary Cap by allowing French to leave.

That is my reference to your stats comments, obviously the Wigan hierarchy think (And me btw) that French is a superb player and would get a game in every team in Super League playing on the wing if necessary.

I never said that Daryl Powell wasn`t interested in stats.

….and yet French’s best performances have come at 1, and Wigan have been better with Miski on the wing with Field at 6 and French at 1.

You don’t need stats to see that.

It is blatantly obvious unless you have eyes painted on.

Yes French can play wing….he is though a much better player for the team at 1 as he has more involvement.

You want your best players to have their hands on the ball more often he does that at 1 and Field still gets plenty of ball if not more at 6.

Why on earth would we sacrifice 1 player for another player when we can accommodate then both and due to the style in which we play is using our wingers to start sets get quick play the balls etc (which Miski is very good at, French not so much as he lacks the physicality of Miski and Marshall).

Without quoting 1 stat it’s clear to see that Miski on the wing, French at 1 and Field at 6 is significantly more effective than French on the wing, Field at 1 and Cust at 6.

It’s not that difficult a concept to grasp for you surely?!

Both Miski and Cust are off contract this year. That is the either or decision Wigan will make, and we’re I a betting man i’d wager Miski will be retained and Cust will leave.

You stated that "French isn`t nearly effective on the wing as Miski", I happen to disagree with you.

If Miski was a better player than French, he would have been selected more often on the wing instead of French.

…and going forward when everyone is fit he will be.

The way we play Miski is more effective on the wing than French is.

I know you don’t like stats…but the stats will 100% back that up.

You can disagree….but you are wrong.

You are confusing the issue. It’s never been French or Miski.

The selection question is Miski or Cust….not Miski or French.

I am not confused, I never said that "French isn`t nearly as effective on the wing as Miski", and no matter how you dress-up your replies to me, you stated that.

I do disagree with you on that, and the selection of French instead of Miski by Wigan, for the wing position shows that Peet also disagrees with you, otherwise he would have played Miski.

It's only since these Wiganers landed on here over the last 48 hours or so - they are proper intelligent sorts, not like the usual Wire know-nothings that usually inhabit here...

Wigan’s wings are primarily there to make meters early in the tackle count. That is their primary job.

If you listen to the interview with Marshall after the Wire game he even confirms this.

Miski is better at this than French.

Peet has been trying to accommodate French, Field and Cust in the team.

The selection hasn’t been French or Miski, it’s been Cust or Miski. You don’t seem to be able to grasp that. French and Field when fit are in the 13 without doubt.

French is a better winger and player than Miski.

The way Wigan play Miski is more effective in our system.

The stats you don’t want to discuss only confirm this.