I'm quite glad to hear Lenagan come out and bag somebody rather then the same old lines being trotted out. People talk a lot in sport now about their being no loyalty but I think Lenagan has bucked that trend to be fair to him. The club is patient and try's its best not to hold players back by letting them go out on loan deals whilst still making sure they know they're part of the club. They also try to do the best for the players on loan by letting them play against them. Add in the amount of long term contracts they give out and I think the club treats the players very well. We certainly don't have a Salford style revolving door that players and coaches are constantly going through (well not by our own choice anyway).

On the other side of the coin we've had player after player decide they're moving on so I can understand Lenagan losing a bit of patience.

I can understand Lenegan being frustrated but it's come across as quite bitter. It sounds more Koukash than Lenegan. While the club have no doubt looked after him very well and shown faith in him, there's no point kidding ourselves that the club does it out of the goodness of its heart. The club makes business decisions based on what is in their best interests. No doubt Thornley has done the same.

Didn't Thornley skip out the door once before when good money was on offer?

I can't say I blame him, but I don't think we'll miss him either.

I was very pleased when we re-signed him, but he's done very little to impress since then.

My understanding is that Wane doesn't particularly rate Thornley due to his lack of aggression in training and in competitive matches. Thornley doesn't particularly like Wane probably because they are polar opposites in terms of their characteristics.
I also believe that Thornley wanted to go to HKR immediately but Wane or probably IL vetoed the move because Salford offered to pay more of Thornleys salary.
Personally I'm a bit indifferent on Thornley as a player but can't understand why IL seems fit to slag Thornley off but historically said sod all when Green and Taylor et al left after we paid transfer fees for their services.

Perhaps IL is getting a bit " tetchy " due to this London fiasco !

The big difference is that unfortunately Thornley has missed almost two full seasons through injury. I don't blame the lad at all, he has a young family to support and has decided to take the best offer on the table, good luck to him, loyalty doesn't pay the mortgage.

I think that's the way I'm leaning on this. Ideally they would have given him till the end of the season to prove at least his fitness.

Sadly with his injury record that's a gamble I wouldn't take if I was him. If he got two years guaranteed on the table he did the right thing taking it.

The BBC report isn't clear. On the Club's website it says that Thornley was offered a deal "similar to the one he was on."

[[u:24bwdiom:24bwdiomquote="Itchy Arsenal"My understanding is that Wane doesn't particularly rate Thornley due to his lack of aggression in training and in competitive matches. [/[uThornley doesn't particularly like Wane probably because they are polar opposites in terms of their characteristics.:24bwdiom[/u


Reply

The points you make that I have highlighted could be used to fit the Hampshire situation.
In the first part you say that Wane does not particulary rate Thornley due to his lack of aggression
Substitute that with Wane will not tolerate Hampshire questioning his decision that he is a fullback and fullback only.

In the second part you say that Wane and Thornley are polar opposites due to their characteristics.
Substitute that with Wane will not tolerate any decision that he makes, he rules by fear but the impasse comes when a player be it old or young stands up for his rights.
I honestly believe that Rocky will not be at Wigan next season and the deal may already have been done.

As an aside I also think with the news that Hughes is off to the Wire, Patrick will be here next season based on the fact that if it was on Wanes recommendation that Patrick came to Wigan in the first place he will not want to lose face by releasing after only one season.
That is borne out that Patrick place has never been in question when fit.

I imagine that our offer had strings attached because of his injury record. I cannot blame Thornley for wanting to secure his future. I would certainly move jobs for a better contract. If we had been so interested in keeping him we could have had him resigned, with strings, long ago. The issue with Thornley has always been that, despite his talent, he doesn't punch his weight. The problem this, year is that, neither do our pack.

Patrick will be here next season based on the fact that if it was on Wanes recommendation that Patrick came to Wigan in the first place he will not want to lose face by releasing after only one season.
That is borne out that Patrick place has never been in question when fit.'"

The double standards by Lenegan are laughable, I just hope next time he takes a player off us (Green and Taylor) that he says "the club is delighted to sign player x, he's come for the money "

Lenegan is sat there with his millions slating a player for trying to earn a better wage in what is a very short career, think he needs some perspective.

I doubt whether we paid Green and Taylor more than you did, given the salary cap I'd have thought they would earn more at Hull KR were there weren't the likes of S.Tomkins, Charnley and O'Loughlin taking up cap space

I would seriously doubt either would have gone for less, players play for money especially overseas players. Don't forget we have our own cap constraints and with our lower amount of home grown players will struggle to balance a whole squad. Neither Green nor Taylor will have been our top earners at the time.

:4n3wc29v'"

:29kjbebg
:29kjbebgI think you may be right about Hampshire ie deal done for him to exit.
If that is the case I will seriously consider not renewing my season ticket next season. For me he has more potential at 6 than any youngster that I can remember and I include Edwards in that pool of talent.
I cannot fathom how Hampshire and Williams have never started in tandem for the first team.. A crime if it never happens

The contract has been and is still "on the table" to be signed and has been all season. It's up to him and the club how it all pans out.

I was surprised to hear Rocky has another year on his contract which I thought was his last, there is however another year option after that in the clubs favour which even now I am certain they will take up.

I would not be shocked either to see him play very limited minutes over the next 2 seasons and then be promised the 6 shirt as a carrot in the 2018 season to sign a new deal. If that scenario does play out I know where I would tell the club to go.

In relation to Thornley I think he was maybe the right type of player for the system we used to play, I don't think he is the type of player to take his forwards whilst the pack take a breather.

I don't think this is right, though will happily be proven wrong. I was sure 2016 is the final year in Hampshire's contract (the one year option in the club's favour).

I'm not bashing the lad, but I really don't get the massive uproar about Hampshire saying how he will be a future star etc.
Would it be a blow if he left? Certainly, but I honestly haven't seen anything in his performances in the first team that leads me to believe he would be our best player in the future.

Yes his time in the first team has been limited, but being amazing in U19s does not always translate to being a star player at Super League level. He may well become a very good player, but he hasn't torn teams apart yet, even when he got a little run in the side mid-season, so I'm not sure how people seem to be praising him as the next big thing?

But he's not had a run at 6 which is 'his position'. Until he's had that we can't judge either way

It is double standards because IL is always telling us if we lose a player to the NRL we won't stand in his way. Well if we lose a player to another SL side who has got a better deal in his view what is the difference?

None.

Thornley is out of contract. If IL wanted him to stay he had to outbid HKR. Simple.

Thornley did right if the deal he got from HKR was a better fit for him and his family. There could be other contributing factors about him wanting to leave Wigan only he and his know that . All this guff about Wigan looking after him after he got injured is nonsense IMO after all he got injured playing for Wigan .

Regards , EW

Thornley did say in the local rag that playing every week was the main appeal.

If he doesn't have the confidence to fight Gelling and Sarge for a spot then good riddance. Look at our 3 wingers. All are getting good game time and I'm sure Thornley would next season. Also, is he guaranteed a start at HKR with Mantellato and Whelham there?