I agree with the comments but I remember when Wigan thrashed Whitehaven last year and Sam Tomkins was given the MOM and everybody on this forum wanted Sam in straight away despite it being a very poor team we was playing against and Celtic were poor yesterday but not as bad as Whitehaven

Good to hear that he was pleased about being picked. Lets hope it helps him build confidence. If so and the lad can display more of his massive potential then your grand might have been a brilliant investment in the future of Wigan RL...

The main worry for me from our performance yesterday was the forwards. The backs I thought did well but we seemed to lack intensity and aggression in the pack (apart from Hock and occasional cameos from Feka). If Celtic had had a 2 or 3 powerful forwards I think the game would have been very different. As it was their pack looked weak and our backs were able to win the game comfortably.

I'd agree with that. The only thing I'd add is that I thought Coley had a good opening spell.

I hate to say it but I wasn't impressed by Prescott at all yesterday. He seemed to plod up with the ball and sometimes even adopted Coley's sideways running style. A couple of other posters seemed impressed by his performance, but he seems a long way from his pre-injury form at the end of last season.

You do start to wonder if even our 'appreciated' forwards are weaker than we think.

Most Wigan fans would probably agree that we do okay in the back row stakes. We've got Bailey, Hock, Lockers, Hansen, Tomkins and soon hopefully Mossop all jockeying for selection. But just how effective are these lads in reality?

Even when we play what we assume to be our strongest pack, we're often bested by the opposition. It can't just be down to Fielden's ongoing frailty (though that, I'll grant you, is a huge contributor, given that his wage could probably purchase two top-line prop forwards).

Hansen was Hitman of the Year last year, and gets through a shed-load of work. Lockers tackles his guts out. Tomkins has massive promise, which he'd gradually fulfilling. Hock is the loose cannon, but can also be a wrecking ball when the mood is on him. There's only Bailey who I feel is surplus to requirements.

Yet they keep being dominated by opposing packs.

Maybe we should bite the bullet and consider that even the players we like might not be good enough for where we want Wigan to be.

I thought Bailey looked Ok v Celtic but again it was only Celtic.

It's another one of those ques5ions we won't find the answer to unless Noble makes the right selection calls or leaves.

If he would play Hock and Lockers in the 2ns row and Tomkins at 13 I think we would see a much better back row performance. I think both Lockers and Tomkins are being done no favours by Noble and both would be better players in the different positions. I think Hock would benefit as well as I think Lockers would be a more attacking 2nd row than either of Bailey or Hansen so it would not be so easy for the opposition to close our back row down.

At the moment if they gang up on Hock we don't really have another 2nd rower to trouble them. With this change I suggest I think both Lockers and Tomkins would give the opposition more pause for thought.

Dave

Isn't it funny that how in the last couple of weeks the likes of Phelps, Smith and Coley have upped their performances and they are out of contract at the end of the season

he walked the mom award, he played brilliant i just watched it again on dvd, he set up nearly every try, but i really feel sorry for the lad whatever he does will never be good enough for wigan. i say this as when smith made a tackle the wigan fans actually give an ironic cheer, exactly the same as when mathers played, just give the lads a chance

Well my opinion is Tomkins was MoM partly because he made more than one tackle compared to Smith. If you watch the game and watch Sam Tomkins tackling he puts bigger players down by good technique and does it plenty of times. It is OK to have different opinions and has nothing to do with some vendetta against Smith.

As to the "ironic" cheer I personally thought it was meant in an encouraging way but maybe I am being naive but however that cheer was intended you can't get away from the fact the reason it was made was because his defence has been poor and that is just stating a fact not having a go at him.

Dave

best game smith has had for wigan- we looked very good going out wide yesterday and smith really controlled our attack! well done smith

Smith simply isn't good enough for what we're looking for We're looking for a SL winning team. The no.7 is a key position we need a great 7 to lead us to glory.

Same situation with many of our players, simply lack one thing or another to to good enough to get into a winning team, whether it be ability or attitude.

NEW FB someone to link up in the attacking line (BRISCOE)
Roberts/Richards-take your pick.
Gleeson
Carmont
Ainscough
Tomkins
NEW 7 (ORFORD DOBSON MYLER THURSON)
NEW ENFORCER PROP (ROSS BAILEY PEACOCK MASON O MELEY PRICE CAYLESS)
Tommy
IMPACT PROP (O CARROLL MOI MOI LUKE BURGESS SAM BURGESS FERROLL)
Lockers
Hock
Tomkins
------------

Work out something with Fielden and Riddell to get them out.

BE STRICT. LETS MAKE A WINNING TEAM
Feka, NEW 9 NATHAN FRIEND, Prescott, Farrell

--------------------------------------------------
Players who aren't good enough to be in a winning team-

Hansen
Smith
Phelps
Riddell
Bailey
McClorum
----------