yes, in the case of ST i would have done.

I recall never saying i'd do a better job by the way plus I also recall saying it isn't IL who handles contract negotiations. being a relative of a member of staff at Wigan helps. but you obviously know better so i'll concede to your far superior standing on this forum.

it was either that or sign ZH. neither seem to have the full support of the fanbase. go figure.

ST is not on 1/3 £Million a year and neither would he only command £50 even at his age and even if he was in poor form. his marketing and shirt sale potential alone would command much greater.

so you would have offered big buck contracts to Williams and TT, you would have re-signed sarge, you would have allowed it to get to a point where Bateman is practically on his way out? you would have re-signed JT? you would have let smith go when we had no straight replacement? you would have not shown an interest in drinkwater, or watts when available?

many of the contracts we have handed out PRIOR to this year have been quite laughable at times. I agree things seem to be on the mend now, but this is more than likely down to the realisation at the club that something wasn't right with how they were handling things.

nope, wrong again Miss Cruncher. I have been banging on about the ridiculous marque contract for Williams for around 12 months now. i'm pretty sure we wouldn't have had to offer him marque to retain his services at that young age and i'm also pretty sure had he decided to leave us for Wire then he would have shown his true colours.

The support of the fanbase has nothing to do with it. There were some fans who were unimpressed when we signed George Carmont and appointed Michael Maguire.

You contested that we should have kept a 30-year-old player, who was asking very big money, on the basis that we would have made more money out of him long-term. Which is fatuous nonsense, and you know it.

Whether you're sure or not is irrelevant. You're not making the decisions and you're not the one at Wigan who is having to table transfer fee offers from other clubs. Another fatuous argument.

Well given he was on £300,000 a year in 2011 and his value has risen since then I don't think it would be far off, do you? But you seem to know better so enlighten us. How much is he on?

As for transfer fees, Cas paid £100,000 for 25 year old, then current international fullback and dream team member who had just been Man Of Steel the previous year, Zak Hardaker. Tomkins will be 30 at the start of his next contract, not a current international, not in the dream team and hasn't been in the MOS running for 6 years. In addition he has had 2 years seriously disrupted by injuries prior to this one and has seriously damaged his brand with the recent incident alongside his brother. This isn't Premiership football where individual shirt sales/marketing are worth large sums around the world. Sam's shirt sales and marketing returns to the club will be negligible. So tell me; What transfer fee do you think he would command?

Shall we agree on just under a third of a million and a £75,000 transfer fee? Hey! Let's go mad! Let's say quarter of a million a year and £100,000 transfer fee. Is it still making any financial sense whatsoever? At what point do we get this mythical return in excess of our investment?

yes its pointless asking why we didn't try harder to keep our most marketable player (despite his recent indiscretions). at least he is now actually earning his wage unlike some on the likes of wages akin to his. it was also pointless not trying harder to keep one of our best players.

truly pointless, as is your argument, because it is clear all you see is what is on the pitch.

Miss Cruncher? I'm enjoying the debate, don't embarrass yourself with petty insults.

your response has less substance than mine, but you still feel you are the one in the right here? you aren't the one making those decisions either, so who is to say what I suggested couldn't have been achieved?

seems to me you have a little bee in your bonnet because you don't like me (how judgemental of you, we haven't even met or exchanged phone numbers yet!) and continue to inflate your ego with your well thought out responses. or should I say you are quite simply a bully.

if you have no evidence, no actual argument, no actual positive feedback to my posts then please do not respond.

as long as there are idiots on here choosing to pick on every tiny detail someone says, who continually goes on a crusade to exact a vile and bloody tirade of abuse at someone's post merely because they do not agree with it, then I will continue to amuse myself how I wish i'm afraid.

Problem is, your talking B0llarks.

The internet is funny.... You can read what people write, and it's not what they say, but how they say it.... And you think, they seem a bit of an ar$e