If you behaved like a total twit in work for your final few months, maybe, just maybe, they'd have a little pop at you??...

Given he would have walked on a free at the end of the year is not sensible to have gone for this offer? Doubt we were in a position to be demanding huge cash figures. Wigan could have just waited until next year?

?

I wouldn't be suprised to hear that Warrington and Wigan agreed a fee for Gleeson before Smith enquired whether Mathers might be part of the deal.

I guess that could explain the delay whilst the clubs haggled over the value of Mathers against the already agreed fee.

Although could all be rubbish because what do any of us know?

We obviously had what Wigan wanted so we were the ones with the strength of power when it came to bargaining, Wigan couldn`t risk Gleeson going to the NRL in 20010 as remember thats what his preferred option was. Wigan are renowned for throwing large sums of money around mid season as we all know and i`m sure they would have come up with £180k for Gleeson regardless of the salary cap which they havn`t seemed to bother with at times in past years

No mate. Even if I went to one of our competitors I wouldn't expect any ill feeling. Life's too short.

This is the most disappointing thing about Cullen. You would have expected him of all people to take no crap from players who go through the motions and don't respect the club, he never accepted that when he was a player, but when he became a coach he seemed to cut a lot of slack to talented players like Briers and Gleeson whilst ruthlessly driving out Paul Noone who had the attitude bang right. I think Cullen was so keen on making sure his most talented players were onside with him, that he let a bad culture set in.



I hope you're right, its interesting looking at what Tonys brother has done at Newcastle Knights. Michael Hagan was a bit like Cullen, he played good rugby and let his talented players express themselves on the field, but he also cut them too much slack off the field and after a good start the results stagnated. Brian Smith came in and caused a lot of controversy by moving on some long serving and high profile players, Clint Newton, Josh Perry, Kirk Reynoldson. The Aussie press had an agenda out to get him saying that he was ripping the heart out of the club, too much of an ego-maniac etc. But the Knights board stood by it because they knew that a serious culture change was needed and Smith has a track record of laying down a culture of professionalism everywhere he's been. Now the side is totally transformed, its a young and hungry side, without big names but is tough and competitive, I'm excited to see how the Knights go over the next couple of years.

Tony is the same as his brother in that he goes to clubs and changes the culture there, Huddersfield were wooden spoonists every year and a resting home club for ex Saints or other big club players to wind down their careers, Smith turned them into a hard working fiesty unit which was no longer easy beats, and they have stayed that ever since. Leeds were always full of big names but underachievers, could never go all the way and win Grand Finals, Smith turned them into a club which won on the big occasion, and they have stayed that since.

Gordon Bennett Sally.

That's at least a couple of posts that I'm not disagreeing with you on.

The future's bright ....

Viva Antonio.

You're Sir Fred Goodwin and I claim by £700k pension.

Quote worthing wire="worthing wire"Yes, of course. That's why I'm intrigued by all this. If Smith has seen fit to get rid of Gleeson after such a short time in charge, then that's a pretty damning indictment of our previous coaching regimes. If Smith thinks we can get rid of one of our best players, and still compete, then, again, I'm intrigued. If Smith has decided that he is unable to get the best out of said player, for whatever reason, then, again, it's interesting. If Smith thinks that player X will do for England, but I won't have him around my club, then again, that's rather interesting, no?'" It is but you didn't say that. You said 'the mind boggles' which implied, perhaps wrongly, that you didn't agree with the decision or that you couldn't understand it. This, for me, says it all and explains precisely why Gleeson is a Wigan player:- www.warringtonwolves.org/news/Wolves38640.ink There's nothing to suggest that Smith has thought any of what you have posted above. My guess is that if Gleeson was committed and wanted to be a part of the club under the new regime, he would have been happy for him to do so. But he blatantly didn't. You hit the nail on the head when you said Quote worthing wireIf Smith has seen fit to get rid of Gleeson after such a short time in charge, then that's a pretty damning indictment of our previous coaching regimes. '" . For years we have had a collection of very good players. Smith's plan appears to be to try to build a team. That's going to take some work and clearly it's started.

Quote worthing wire="worthing wire"Yes, of course. That's why I'm intrigued by all this. If Smith has seen fit to get rid of Gleeson after such a short time in charge, then that's a pretty damning indictment of our previous coaching regimes. If Smith thinks we can get rid of one of our best players, and still compete, then, again, I'm intrigued. If Smith has decided that he is unable to get the best out of said player, for whatever reason, then, again, it's interesting. If Smith thinks that player X will do for England, but I won't have him around my club, then again, that's rather interesting, no?'" It is but you didn't say that. You said 'the mind boggles' which implied, perhaps wrongly, that you didn't agree with the decision or that you couldn't understand it. This, for me, says it all and explains precisely why Gleeson is a Wigan player:- www.warringtonwolves.org/news/Wolves38640.ink There's nothing to suggest that Smith has thought any of what you have posted above. My guess is that if Gleeson was committed and wanted to be a part of the club under the new regime, he would have been happy for him to do so. But he blatantly didn't. You hit the nail on the head when you said Quote worthing wireIf Smith has seen fit to get rid of Gleeson after such a short time in charge, then that's a pretty damning indictment of our previous coaching regimes. '" . For years we have had a collection of very good players. Smith's plan appears to be to try to build a team. That's going to take some work and clearly it's started.

Quote Ian [77="Ian [77"It is but you didn't say that. You said 'the mind boggles' which implied, perhaps wrongly, that you didn't agree with the decision or that you couldn't understand it. This, for me, says it all and explains precisely why Gleeson is a Wigan player:- www.warringtonwolves.org/news/Wolves38640.ink There's nothing to suggest that Smith has thought any of what you have posted above. My guess is that if Gleeson was committed and wanted to be a part of the club under the new regime, he would have been happy for him to do so. But he blatantly didn't. You hit the nail on the head when you said . For years we have had a collection of very good players. Smith's plan appears to be to try to build a team. That's going to take some work and clearly it's started.'" I can't say I fully understand the decision, no, because there's all sorts of rumour and speculation flying around, and it's highly unlikely we'll get the real story. The most telling statement perhaps is the 'fully committed' to the club bit. If Gleeson wanted out, then I guess there's little that could be done to keep him - other than perhaps attempt to persuade him he [umight[/u be better off at Warrington than Wigan. Clearly this either wasn't tried or didn't work, for whatever reasons. The upshot is we've lost one of our most talented players - if Smith doesn't fancy trying to get the best out of him, fair enough. But: 1) Gleeson needs replacing in the squad and 2) I'd like to see if Smith picks him for England again.

Quote Ian [77="Ian [77"It is but you didn't say that. You said 'the mind boggles' which implied, perhaps wrongly, that you didn't agree with the decision or that you couldn't understand it. This, for me, says it all and explains precisely why Gleeson is a Wigan player:- www.warringtonwolves.org/news/Wolves38640.ink There's nothing to suggest that Smith has thought any of what you have posted above. My guess is that if Gleeson was committed and wanted to be a part of the club under the new regime, he would have been happy for him to do so. But he blatantly didn't. You hit the nail on the head when you said . For years we have had a collection of very good players. Smith's plan appears to be to try to build a team. That's going to take some work and clearly it's started.'" I can't say I fully understand the decision, no, because there's all sorts of rumour and speculation flying around, and it's highly unlikely we'll get the real story. The most telling statement perhaps is the 'fully committed' to the club bit. If Gleeson wanted out, then I guess there's little that could be done to keep him - other than perhaps attempt to persuade him he [umight[/u be better off at Warrington than Wigan. Clearly this either wasn't tried or didn't work, for whatever reasons. The upshot is we've lost one of our most talented players - if Smith doesn't fancy trying to get the best out of him, fair enough. But: 1) Gleeson needs replacing in the squad and 2) I'd like to see if Smith picks him for England again.