If someone offers new information or something which I didn’t consider I’m happy to discuss and debate; does that mean I have to change my opinion? Not at all.
Look at how you deal with people who have a difference in opinion ‘you’re wrong’ is how you deal with opposite opinions.
And then try to manipulate facts and figures to support your point (as it kills you to learn someone doesn’t agree with you)
You chose to mention coaches making Lockers a captain; when did we discuss leadership? Is always the captain the best player? No. This is also doesn’t consider the landscape of the team at the time etc.
I’ve purposely avoided posting Batemans successes (which are easy accessible on the Wigan website) because I can read between the lines, I can identify when someone wants to have a discussion or just bicker and argue.

Case in point, look at your last line, when did I say people should accept what I say? I haven’t. It’s just my opinion.

Already I’m disappointed with myself; for getting into this when I shold have just avoided engaging with you.

FWIW; Lockers is my current fav Wigan player. Love the man. But I do believe Bateman was better age for age.

Gildart is a far better player than O'Loughlin or Bateman at 21 (in the centres).

Then quote the like for like facts that support your argument then I have something concrete to debate instead of just taking the "this is my opinion, therefore it's right" line. I've offered you concrete information to disprove your theory and you've offered nothing but your opinion in return. That's why I said you were wrong. If you don't think you are, show me why.

You do realize every criticism you just levelled at me also applies to you, don't you? You want your opinion to go unchallenged and when someone has the temerity to disagree with you you're "disappointed with yourself" for engaging with them. Why is that? I haven't insulted you or even been impolite. I've merely offered an opposing opinion. This is a forum. I'd link you to a definition of what that means but you'd only think me condescending or something similar but suffice to say that is what these boards are for. Why would you take it personally if someone takes the time to enter a discussion with you?

Back to the discussion in hand. I mentioned the captain point because, it disproves your "only became the player we know later" point as he was regarded highly throughout his career. You don't necessarily give the captaincy to your best player but you sure as hell don't give it to one of the worst! By and large it is given to the players regarded among the best and, yes, very often to the best. Look at his rivals for the captaincy at international level if you want further proof.

Look, you're entitled to your opinion (even a wrong one!

), of course you are. But if you object to someone having a different one and saying so you really need to question why you're posting on this board. I'm asking a genuine question here.. Why do you take it personally? I disagree with many posters on here. Look at DaveO for example. I doubt we've agreed on more than a handful of topics in over a decade of posting but he takes it in the spirit it's intended.

Glad to hear Lockers is your favourite player btw. That's something we can definitely agree on!



PS. Which facts and figures have I manipulated? I don't know what you're referring to there.

I'd like to argue, Andy, but you're right there!

Gildart excellent news. Would have been very hard to replace.

I hope Bateman stays, I do think though he is very replaceable. I don’t think we can replace him from SL but comfortably I think the NRL will provide us with a quality replacement.

Comparing SOL with Bateman is unfair. Bateman is a great player, SOL was a great player too at the same age, with much more to his game.

SOL has been World Class, Bateman will never be World Class.

I think it's probably you who are the exception here. Not many think Hardaker is a Sam T kind of full back.



OK. Blake Green. Feel better now? Is he available? No idea. Would he come if we asked. No idea. I can name any random non-rep NRL halfback you like but I have no idea what the contract status is of any of them are nor do I know if they would be amenable to a move to the UK. That is what Radlinski is paid to find out. So given I think we need a better 7 to exploit Hardaker's talent I also think Radlinski needs to get on a plane to Oz to go and find one.

Great news, glad he's decided to stay.

Considering Gildart (seemingly) hasn’t been given marquee status, one could assume that Bateman would receive it or we have a signing in the pipeline (if Bateman goes)?

There is a rumour posted on the A&L facebook page from some NRL source that says both Sutton and Bateman are off to the Raiders.

They also said Gildart was going to Saints

Bateman is not marquee status!

Lockers had this weird stigma attached to him in his early to mid twenties that he was some sort of average Joe (by a section of Wigan fans and most opposition fans) and it took that man of the series performance you mention, years worth of ridiculously consistent performances for Wigan and latterly another couple of international man of the series awards before pretty much everyone has been turned around.

John Bateman is top superleague quality and has the potential to be a good international player but he isn’t and won’t ever be in Sean O’Loughlins League. He doesn’t have the natural ball skills or size of Lockers. These two things combined have made him the World Class player he has been (and on the odd occasion he still is).