Aren't testimonials used by players to raise money for their chosen charities rather than the money going to themselves?

Some do some don't!

A lot of RL players aren't paid that well for sportsmen IMO, especially when you consider how many injuries they pick up, the longevity of their careers (15 years at SL level, often less) and the constant lure of NRL/Union. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Hansen shattered his wrists by putting off an operation so he could save us from relegation? Either way he's tackled his backside week in week out for us for a decade, he deserves every penny he gets

If what I've been told is true then the deal has already been done, Hansen will be a Salford player in 2014.

I was just looking up the second row choices for the super league dream team. Over the last six seasons the following have been chosen - Westwood (4 times), and once each for Kirmond, Ferres, Hock, Menzies, Joel Tomkins, Galea, Newton and Ellis.

I wonder how people would rate HH against these. And given that Wigan have been the most succesful team in this period, epecially over the last 4 seasons why hasn't HH ever been picked?

A major positive of Hansen for me is how consistent he is. He rarely seems to have a bad game, never mind a bad season, and the nature of his game is bound to mean he will often go unnoticed as he's primarily a grafter.

I wonder how much cap space he is taking up compared with the players mentioned, and how he compares with back rowers on similar salaries. Even ignoring those factors I'd still feel far more confident going to a season with him than a player who will tear a team apart one game, then throw wild offloads, give away needless penalties and hardly make any tackles the next. Not naming any names

P.S Did you know only one of the top 10 tacklers from this season made the dream team?

Well only Jamie Peacock and Faz from top 4 teams, made the top 10 tacklers in the competition, so I don't understand your point.

I'd rather have HH than Hock too, but I think I'll be more than happy with Faz and whoever SW picks. I think that Bateman could be a real star and I think he needs game time to make up lost ground in 2013. He was the best young back rower in the country by far in 2012.

There's a sense of deja vu about this (see the thread about Blake). I understand people not wanting to lose HH. But there are so many good (potentially great) young players coming through that IMO we won't miss him. And I suggest that is what SW thinks too.

Probably because all those chosen offer more in attack - HH offers excellent defence and work rate but just about all the forward in that list have better stats for tries scored and assists and I suspect that is why they have been chosen above him. Many of the forwards mentioned have very good off-loading games - something HH is lacking.

If it was a choice purely on defence then I would choose HH above several on the list but as an all round player it is hard to argue against him not being on that list.

My point is that defensive players tend to get ignored in these lists. IMO Hansen's defensive work rate as well as his experience is something that we shouldn't sell lightly, if we do sell him at all, especially as we need to hit the ground running this season as we have the World Club Challenge in just over 2 months. No disrespect to Bateman/Clubb but who would you want tasked with starting in the back row against Sonny Bill and JWH?

That's simple. I'd rather have HH against SBW. However, I'm not sure he'll be fit. Also (and I've made this point elsewhere) we were without him for the first ten games last season and weren't exactly found wanting, actually we were top of the league. I'm not underplaying his contribution, which has been immense, but it's just that I think we will, over the course of the season, be just fine and quite possibly, better off, because the youngsters might match his defence but be better in attack. You don't get to play for Wigan without being able to defend properly anyway. Sorry for not catastrophising.

The first ten games of last season counted for naff all. The two finals counted for everything because alas that is the way it is and in both finals H was immense. If you think youngsters "might match his defence but be better in attack" in semi-finals, finals and play offs I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land.

will one of the youngster come in and improve on hansen this season? no they wont can they with a couple years of development yes. To be honest if he wants to go to salford and they are paying for him its a good deal.

I'm not sure that your assertion is correct. If Wigan had lost the first ten games would they have got to the GF? The first ten games might have counted for naff all but they saw the team playing with a lot of flair and confidence. And that gave youngsters like Thornley confidence to go on and do ok in the Challenge Cup final and Grand Final after replacing the similarly irreplacable Carmont.

With a full season behind them maybe Bateman or Hughes can do the same. HH was immense last season, but maybe Wigan have seen the best of him and are right to cash in.

Change happens in sport as the best teams evolve whilst they are winning. Wigan are bringing in youngsters with huge potential from a position of strength (ie double winners).

By the way, I'm sure that you've seen Bateman play - are you not impressed? (Bulls win at DW in 2012 for example) I'm betting that he will be a huge player for us and for England. He'll need plenty of game time next season and maybe SW is thinking that keeping HH will impede this.

You could be right, maybe I am living in cloud cuckoo land, but if so I've got SW for company!!!

Personally I'd like Hansen to stay on another year just because our squad is lacking senior players. Outside of Bowen, Lockers and Hansen the rest of the squad falls between 21-27ish, presuming that Lauaki and Powell either won't play much, or at all.

Why this preoccupation with age and experience?

This current Wigan team may be young, but they're not inexperienced - they are double winners.

Some like MMc and Goulding may be young but they've won six trophies in 4 years. You may need older heads around when the youngsters have no experience but our youngsters like Taylor, Thornley, and Flower are now double winners. Faz and Josh may be young but they've packed as much experience in already than most do in a whole career.

I'm not sure why you feel that these guys need an older head around?