I think as others have said in this thread, the problems we face will not be solved by bringing in a new coach. Our recruitment and player retention strategy has been poor for some time, leaving us with a squad that is imbalanced in a number of ways. Our focus on youth is laudable, and I enjoy seeing these lads getting a run in the first team, but we've crying out for real size in the forwards for years. Bullock is a step in the right direction as is Burgess if he was fit, but we need bigger bodies who can do damage in attack and defence. The game yesterday was the type of game that exposed us badly in that respect (without taking any credit from Leeds who were excellent).

More than anything, I'm getting tired of what I think is sentimentality about the town's tradition in the sport and ex-Wigan players, which I assume comes from the top. Lockers was very poor yesterday, this myth about him being brought out like a vintage car for the special occasion is nonsense, he doesn't get enough game time and it showed yesterday. The Edwards fiasco was for me, pure sentimentality, which we doubled down on by bringing another ex-player in as interim coach. The focus on youth is another sign of the same thing and it no longer seems to make sense financially, because a lot of these lads see SL as a stepping stone to the NRL so we rarely keep them until they reach their prime. If you look at the backroom staff, it's the same story.

At the end of the day, we're all Wiganers, we all know the history of the club, its great PR to say '8 of these 13 came through the wigan academy' but actually winning big games and building on our legacy is the best kind of PR.

Bar the last month we must of been watching two different teams as we have been poor in many matches and obviously choked big time in every big game.
We still look like we don't actually have a game plan or set moves, but its all opinion's i suppose.

I cannot see Lam being given the heave ho. Despite the circumstances he finished top of the pile and that counts for something. At last the defence seems to have been organised to allow the rest of the team to play. In the forwards we can all see that we are one dominant prop short and someone need to carry the can for the George Burgess fiasco but probably not Lam. Other than that we look as good for next season as I can remember. The backs worry me because I like to see pace outside and our wingers all seem to be broken.
I think that we look better balanced when we can go with three forwards and a back on the bench so seeing Clubb, O'loughlin and Burgess keeping a single seat warm is a really frightening prospect. A real test of Lams leadership qualities will be if he can say to those three "Sorry lads but you have not done enough to warrant inclusion".

Of course you can.

Some coaches work out, others don't.

Look at the appointment of Ian Millward. A total success at Saints, a disaster at Wigan.

It's never as simple as you guys who are constantly (and pointlessly) lobbying for the chairman's removal always claim.

Adrian Lam is here because Ian Lenagan made one mistake: trusting Shaun Edwards. Line that up against all his trophy wins and he doesn't look like so much of a catastrophe..

This GF semi is the big test for Lam. If we win then he's safe. If the team perform as they have done in the past three semis under his coaching then he will go. Perhaps not for 2021 as IL could well sign him for a year which will give him 12 months to find a quality coach.
Come 2022 and it's the club's 150th anniversary when all expectations from everyone associated with the club will be a trophy (s). Having a coach in place in 2022 who can't win semis is quite simply not an option.
So this GF semi is massively important for Lam.

With the 150 year anniversary, are we forgetting the few years in which we didn't exist?