Tomkins is a much better starting hooker than he is a bench hooker but he isn't going to start in front of McIlorum anytime soon, probably best for his career if he moves on.
Re Powell, he suffers from the same basic problem as Tomkins, lack of pace, so where he's going to fit in the great scheme of things I don't know.

Don't think he does, TBH

End of this season could spell the end of:

J Hughes
G Burke
L Tomkins
R Hampshire
S Powell

I'd much rather have Logan playing hooker off the bench than Powell. However, Powell does also provide cover in the halves if one of Williams/Smith were to get injured.

It's a tough one, but I can understand the reasoning behind Logan leaving. Powell is a top halfback who I expect will also leave after this season. The lad needs need consistent game time to progress.

We'll find out whether the Championship sides are truly ready to step up in a couple of month's time. Those you mention probably are, but with Workington where they are at the moment I'd question the current efficacy of a DR relationship. Old chestnut, but it's really beyond time we had a properly representative Cumbrian side instead of trying to maintain the status quo, and only end up as perennial also-rans.

The frustration I believe is that if he isn't selected he isn't busting a gut to get more game time or particularly worried or upset on missing out on a place. This nonchalant approach certainly isn't the current Wigan way.
Maybe a move to somewhere like Wakefield where he could work with Brian Smith and learn a totally different approach would benefit him. For me he just lacks that bit of devilment that all hookers seem to have.

Im not sure what position Powell would consider to be his natural role. The constant chopping and changing certainly isn't helping the lad and my comment on him wasn't intended to be critical per se just that he isn't an hooker. I personally do not like this view that a player should be capable of playing half back or hooker equally well I personally can't recall anyone in recent memory who actually could do this.

How about Rob Burrow and Kevin Sinfield. Leeds have never had two out-and-out hookers in the 17 (apart from a short time when Buderus and Diskin shared duties). And as the most successful club of recent years maybe their coaches know something?

Last Saturday having SOL spell MMc for ten minutes worked well, and that is something that Matty could do as well. IMO there is no need for a second hooker on the bench. Whoever starts at 9 can do 65/70 minutes no problem. If MMc gets knackered doing that then give him a few weeks off in July. He'll get one week off at the end of June anyway!

In reading Matty Peats summing up of the Wigan academy grinding a result out against Cas away, Matty gives Waterworth a lot of praise for the way he controlled the ruck.
He went on to say that the work Luke is doing with MM in training is starting to pay off, so it seems that Waterworth is next in line to push to get into the first team squad.

Best for all concerned, really.

I don't think he's cut out to make it at Wigan. He's too lightweight in defence and doesn't offset that with a great ability to attack the opposition (like say Clarke).

We will have to disagree on this.
Rob Burrow is for me the perfect example of a player who has played both roles and has been average at both.
Why can't we have a hooker who plays 80 minutes? The only reason hookers get spelled is because of the totally ludicrous number of substitutions that the game currently permits. It may be an old fashioned point of view but nothing and I mean nothing can convince me that the increase in the number of subs tuitions has had any long term benefit to the sport.
By the way good to see you back as I always thought you were well balanced in your views and respected others views even if they differed from yours.

Well I strongly agree about the substitutions, the game would surely be improved by a reduction in them.

I have a much higher opinion of Rob Burrow than you do, though. Even now I'd be happy to see him in a Wigan shirt (not that there's any chance of that happening).

Thanks for the kind words.

Yes I do agree that MMc should do the full 80. Certainly no need for a hooker on the bench

I am with Moto about Burrow. He almost single handedly won the 2011 (I think) GF against Saints. He still puts the fear of bejaysus up me when he comes on!!

Powell was much better today after a shaky opening.

Was that the game where he ran down the left wing, threw a dummy, and the defender nearly ended up in the stands? So funny!

Maybe he's leaving due to the likely reduction in interchanges from 10 to 6.
They will still go with three props/back row so who will the fourth be?
Perhaps they are looking at a half who can play a number of positions be it 6,7 & 9.
Maybe the specialist 9 off the bench is going to be redundent when the reduction come into force?