Agreed.

so if all this is true about ainscough wages going up , so hows sam not clashing with salary cap surely noble was expecting sam to be playing all these games why would a young player who s trying to break into the squad have this claus in his contract answers on a post card

Ainscough - Done better than predicted
Tomkins - Was expected to play 12+ games

This is a must win game, just as much if not more than last week, Noble has to pick the team he thinks will win it, we need a strong cup run and to get to Wembley! Lets reserve judgement, whatever the reason. Yes i feel sorry for the lad but his chances will come, he has a great future in front of him!

I can't see the logic in the above. If you don't think Riddell should play i.e. a senior pro walking right back into the side in place of a young player who had a great game in his place, why should Ainscough not have kept his place the week before?

The not changing a winning team argument doesn't wash because he changed the winning team from Wakefield.

Ainscough should have played last week and just because he didn't doesn't mean not playing him week is right as well.

We must be the only team in the league with a coach stupid enough not to select not only the teams but the leagues its top try scoring player.

Dave

Agreed, the amount of trash spoken on this topic. Noble is the coach, he gets "paid the cabbage" for the decisions he makes. No you lot.

But Brian Noble got it right last week by dropping Ainscough, didn't he?

To be fair to Noble, he might get it right this week again but Riddell and McIlorum are both solid number 9's and neither IMO are effective impact hookers unlike Thomas Leuluai, who should replace McIlorum/Riddell at 9 and then allow Sam Tomkins to fill in at 7.

If you had 2 established wingers in your riversiders team and one week a young 17 year old lad filled in due to one of them picking up a knock and scored 4 tries would you pick him the week after???

All depends on the opposition and how the injured players form was prior to picking up the knock.

If rumours are correct, leaving Ainscough out is nothing to do with his ability, its a major balls up by the club.

They filled the wrong names in when submitting the starting 17 to the RL?

Are we in the same situation with Ainscough as Wire were with Penny?

IIRC, Penny received a heavily increased deal after playing a number of (then impressive) games.

I'm not suggesting Ainscough will end up like Penny as he clearly has more raw talent and more to his game, but Wire are now paying big bucks to a kid who was nothing more than a flash in the pan.

(FWIW, I think Ainscough will become a superstar at Wigan, and hopefully England)

It is difficult to say he got i right last week as we will never know how Ainscough would have gone in the same game instead of Roberts, but what we can say he picked a winning team last week and played on the weakness' of the Saints wingmen with the kicking game, Roberts used his height to set up the first try so that worked for him.

Looking at the Wakefield team as it perhaps will be they will have Grix and Peterson who i would say on the high ball are probablly more solid than either of the Saints wingmen, but both are flawed in other areas, areas i think Ainscough is better suited to exposing over anybody in our squad.

Its a big call from the coach and to be honest I think Roberts is playing himself into some form, i think it is an insite into BN's way of thinking though as he is taking the low risk option by playing Roberts and Pat on the wing over Ainscough, which in his position is probably the right call.

If only it was that simple.

I am certain of it, assuming we can keep him in the code.