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.

Then that's great news.

"You can't assure us of any such thing. You're a fan, just like us"

Good to see that comment hit home.

But as I said before, our conversation's over.

Good to see hypocrisy is your strong point.



As over as it was when you posted this response, or over according to definition of the word? You appear somewhat unsure.

I'm not sure to be honest. I can't say I've been bowled over by Noble's judgement calls in recent times.

Maybe not, but it's exactly how things should work.

I agree with brettkenny tbh.

The coach should make the decisions re signings, not the management (IF supposing that what has been rumoured is true). The coach is there to deal with the rugby aspect of a club, if he isn't then head coach would be the chairman end of.

If this is true, then its a HUGE problem and needs sorting asap.

It isn't a huge problem. It's actually one of the most overstated 'problems' at Wigan. But not just at Wigan.

Tell you don't really believe that the head coach should be able to sign players willy nilly, signing any cheque he sees fit, without at least consulting the guy who holds the purse-strings. Tell me you don't believe that.