Mark Flanagan should be given a chance. He was brilliant for Fax last year, better than some of the overseas cr@p you got anyway.

We've only got one 'overseas' back row player. Or are you saying he's a better winger than Richards and Roberts or a better halfback than Smith and Leuluai?

To be fair, it doesn't take much to shine there does it?
Fancy Mathers for a while??

Carmont and Goulding!!!! I think your having a laugh to be honest, and Fielden getting into any superleague side, I really think you must be kidding there!

Excellent contribution to the debate there well done.... So come on then you've gotta give reasons why you disagree haven't you? Or are we all mind readers?

Can't believe i'm gonna justify it as it's a perfectly good statement but here goes anyway;

Carmont was the leagues best centre last season. There is probably one centre that’s better than him in SL and thats Gidley. Hardly a bad situation to be in imo.

Goulding is better than Phelps imo and I’ve not seen anything from the other centres that i mentioned over the course of last season to suggest he’s not as good as them.

As a centre pairing Carmont and Goulding is a good one and we could do far worse.

Also can you tell me a team that has four better props than Fielden? He's not the best prop in the league but he's still better than 90% of the others. He's good enough to get in any SL team and if you can't see that then i don't know what you were watching last season? Put it this way I’d take him over Leuleui and Bailey at Leeds and they are the champs. If he would be good enough to get in the best team in SL then he’s hardly a bad player.

Should go with tomkins, hansen, locky, with hock on bench, put bailey back in centres till pryce is fit!

Whoever does the stats got that one wrong for a start, he was skinned twice or do they not count the ones that he never lays a hand on the opposition player, a miss which lead to a crucial try for Wakefield.

I agree in what you say, i just do not think it applies to Bailey anymore, we have Hock and Locky who are more than happy to and capable of doing the dirty work. Tomkins at 13 for his handling. Hock on the bench for his impact, backrow sorted in my opinion.

I suspect Pryce will not be fit enough to play centre for quite some time - probably 1/2 way through the season I suspect his appearance will be on the wing for a while. So should we have Bailey at centre that long - I think not. Bailey is better as a starting 2nd row to keep things tight then interchange wth someone like Hock.

If we are going to make change at centre then Goulding should be given a chance - personally I wqould go with Richards, Roberts,Carmont , Goulding and either Phelps or Ainscough as a back line. With Pryce as cover.

As a big Bailey critic I can't see how supporters can be content with just a good defensive display. You talk about 'one dimensional view of the game' but surely this is what you're doing by being satisfied by just his defensive side of his game? How many times do you see Bailey running good angles off the halfbacks, making breaks, seeing him in space and linking up with the backs? On the few occaisions he does link up with backs he stops the flow of play and fails to create opportunities.

What did Bailey do different on Sunday that Harrison Hansen can't? IMO Hansen is a better attacking player, especially when in close radius to the opposition tryline.

Hansen was sat on the bench for too long on Sunday and it's shame considering it was for the expence of Bailey.

Ideally I'd like him to be explosive in attack and a workaholic in defence - unfortunately there aren't many 2nd rows like that.

He makes us alot harder to beat when he's in the team. Not just the tackling he does but his technique in allowing the defence to get set is far better than most at wigan. There is room for both Hansen and Bailey.

The main point though, is that replacing Bailey with Hansen say WILL NOT improve our team and results. There are far more important issues to resolve at Wigan than criticising Bailey for his lack of attack. IMO it makes us look stupid when we slag off players just because they are aussies or are easy targets, rather than looking at their actual contribution to the team and where the fundamental problems lie.

For example - we would be a much improved team;

If we were to have more runners at the ptb for a start, making it harder for the defence to pick the runner - we make more ground and we get a quicker ptb.
If we were to give our ball carriers more options - we put doubt in the defence.
If we were to cut out the number of errors we make - we play in a better field position.
If our players were the fittest in the league.
If we used the bench properly - with impact players on it and a proper plan for rotating the hooker.

These are fundamental things that will improve wigan as a team. Swapping Bailey out of the team will probably make us easier to beat.

I prepare to get shot down, but we have one in Sean O'Loughlin.

Having Bailey out on pitch for the majority of the game stunts our attacking power. What's the point in replacing him with another defensive player in Harrison Hansen who IMO is a better player? If we drop Bailey and start Hansen it gives us another attacking option off the bench, something that we're missing at the moment.

I would have Hansen on the pitch before Bailey anytime at the moment. For me Bailey is not the player we thought we were getting when we signed him.

Hansen
O'Loughlin
Joel

S - Hock

with 2 props and a back.

Bingo.

Hansen - Defence
O'Loughlin - Attack/Defence
Tomkins - Attack

Hock - Impact

Although he needs to improve generally, Andy Coley can switch between both positions and gives us versatility and options.