I think your dead right there mate

We signed a winger and a hooker when we needed a prop and stand off.

Phelps
Ainscough
Gleeson
Carmont
Richards
*STAND OFF*
Sam
Fielden
Tommy
*PROP*
Hock
Hansen
Lockers

Feka
Joel
Prescott
McIlorum

That should have been what the side shaped up like but recruitment made was the wrong choice of players (apart from Gleeson)

Its a poor state of affairs if he didn't, it makes it harder for the chairman to sack noble if he buys players the coach doesnt want. Who is running WRLC ?

This is what im asking. Who is making the signings. This doesn't look like a BN squad.

Its lacking a world class half back and 2 world class props.

Gleeson has sorted the backs, we now have 3 wingers for 2 positions, Richards is never ever a fullback.

Lol Noble probably didn’t want Riddell but to start to suggest Noble isn’t signing players but instead it’s IL doing it is laughable. It just goes how far some people we go to defend Noble and the straws they will clutch at.

It’s pure fantasy to think that Noble would still be here if he wasn’t allowed to sign the players he wanted simple as! Why would any coach stay at a club when the owner is interfering in such a big aspect of the coaches job.

If it is true then Noble needs to grow a back bone. Either way it’s laughable or Noble is a wimp/puppet neither one is welcome as Wigan’s head coach imo.

Im not defending him. I have said in other threads, time has past for Noble at Wigan.

I am askign questions that need to be answered.

Why didnt we sign the halfback & prop that Stevie Wonder could see we needed?

Why sign Roberts - he isn't a Noble player and wasn't needed.

Gleeson fair enough.

Who actually bought Riddell and why didn't we sign Ennis?

Who made these decisions - they are responsible for alot of our problems.

Unless it's in his contract the club does not have to pay him up fully. They can negotiate a severance package and in any case the longer we go into the season the less paying him up costs.

But it if did cost £100K so what? If IL wants to change coach or isn't going to renew Nobles contract then he must weigh up what the cost is of keeping him on. My guess is lost gate money will easily cost more than that.

And that is only the financial cost. The cost in terms of what state the team will be in come the end of the season if we carry on like this is anyone's guess and a new coach would have to inherit that.

In short if the decision has been made on Noble's future and he is not going to get a new deal then he needs to go now not later.



The money issue is IMO largely irrelevant. As I said the financial cost of keeping Noble on could well exceed the cost of getting rid. The last reason we need to keep him is because it is in some way too difficult to get rid.

It's just the same old "we need stability" argument rehashed.

The only reasons Noble should keep his job are positive ones if anyone can find any. I don't see the financial cost (or the idea we need stability when it has failed to deliver) as a positive reason to keep him on.

Dave

There was much talk of 4 meeting a year regarding recruitment when IL first came to the club between himself and the coach, i would suggest it is not as cut and dried pinning the recruitment issue to either one if these recruitment meetings have gone on both need to question there actions.

What i will say is good players which Riddell and Roberts undoubtedly are going off previous form do not suddenly become poor players over night, the issue for me runs deeper than this and mainly at the hands of the coach, who is simply unable to utilise them in the correct way on the field.

Riddell for example is a creative hooker, but can do sod all when presented with no options.

I agree but when I questioned the signing of Roberts a year early when it happened I was accused of simply having a pop at IL.



I must have been saying we need a prop for about three seasons now and I have consistently expressed my reservations over TL since he arrived. TL is a player who IMO gives 100% but in his first couple of seasons was inconsistent and now I think it is plain why NZ moved him to 9.

Dave

we aren't warrington

If the management is interfering in recruitment then that needs to be tackled FIRST. It undermines the coach completely and threatens to disrupt team cohesion.

Under such divisive circumstances it's not difficult to imagine cliques forming with one side claiming the other has no right to be at the club. Especially if results aren't good.

What RL coach genuinely (not solely for monetary reason) wants to work in such an atmosphere with his hands tied behind his back?

It's insane.

Completely agree.........but it happens.


I am not saying it's currently happening at Wigan, but one or two of the aquisitions (or lack of) do raise a few questions.

It isn't happening at Wigan. All signings are discussed by the coach and the board before any decisions are made, and the coach can veto any one of them.