Or planted any.
However the sapling is growing.

It may have cost us other players though as there would be no marquee spot to offer to another player or any wiggle room under the cap with whatever does count on Tomkins salary (plus any saving they’d make by moving another player in to the marquee slot). Having Tomkins for one year and him then leaving to add to a number of other exits this one year due to him staying would’ve been bad business.

The pressure is on Radlinski in particular now and in a big way. If Tomkins is followed out the door by Sutton, Gildart and Bateman then there will be an absolute storm blown up and it’ll be difficult for him to avoid a great deal of heat. On the flip side if he gets the younger lads tied down and Hardaker in then people will accept that this move may well be for the best.

Pretty much my thoughts, which I've stated several times this year. Powell is solid at best, he does the basics and not much more. He is covered by the fact we have Tomkins at FB as he acts like a third half. Remove him and replace him with Hardaker and we lose that ball player and we are left with a running fullback.

This is a pretty critical time, Tomkins leaving is a much bigger problem than replacing a fullback, it now puts even more pressure on our limited halves. If the club fail to acknowledge and address it, we could be in for some torrid rugby next year. My fear is Wane does his usual and stand by players based purely on effort level.

I for one cannot see how it could be for the best - we lose four very good players (possibly developing into even better players in the case of Sutton and Gildart) and so far are looking like gaining one very good on his day but more limited skill set player who everyone will be waiting for the next brain fart from (and it is hard not see it happening somewhere down the line).

There will have to be some very good and clever recruitment in addition to get even close to being on a par let alone being for the best. If this scenario does come to pass then we would need a centre , a prop, maybe a second row and another half-back and at least similar levels to be even close - and where they will come from in anyone's guess and the track record of the current regime at Wigan does not inspire much confidence on recruiting from outside the club. And the worry is there are few signs of any of the current crop of youngsters at the club knocking on the first team door at present.

Meanwhile Saints could have Percival and Gildart as there long term centres - nice of us to help them isn't it?

Perhaps by giving Williams a marquee wage certain other young players want parity as well It was always a risk giving so much to a player so young perhaps now we are seeing the effects.

Full back in modern rugby is far more important than the halves. I could even argue a fantastic 9 can be as effective and have more impact that the halves.

Why? FB is the creative position, how they link in the line, they have the decisions to throw the right pass or dummy out in the 3/4s, even how you enter the line (when and where) is often upto the FB.
6 and 7 have become structured positions. Take a 7; they control the right edge, but options are often simplified aa set plays are ran, usually a 7 will have limited options: 'show and go', look long pass short (usually to the SR) or look short and find the FB out the back. Apart from that they have to kick and keep communication, which is now often led by the 9 or 1.

Do we need a marquee 7? No. Just a player with the ability to play the options discussed well and of course defend their position.
How does Powell fit into this? He can defend his position very well, he doesn't need to be shifted out wide to be protected, this is massive, especially with a winger like Marshall who is also undersized, can you imagine Powell and Marshall defending a high ball on the same edge? Even greats like Lockyer was placed further out wide next to Talis for tacking and protection.
However Powell, like Smith, like Tommy fail on what is required, firstly with pace, acceleration. Each time a 6/7 gets his hands on the ball the opposition line needs to be switched on as the half should have the pace to show and go and break the line with pace, Williams can the others mentioned can't.
Defending a slow half is way easier. You can give them space and know they can't beat you on the inside, meaning they have to pass, so you can move the defensive line slightly over in anticipation of a pass making the whole move easier to defend.
Plus Powell's passing isn't sharp enough, needs to be quick and precise to whoever is receiving.

So what do we need in a 7? In the modern game?
-Acceleration
-Precise quick passing
-Kicking game
-defensively strong
(all within the structure)

Once upon a time the requirements for a 7 was way longer, they were the brains, made a team tick (See the masterful Andy Greg) but now the game is different.

Tomkins cost £75K on the cap. That offers very little flexibility of giving anyone a pay rise because he is leaving given we obviously have to pay Hardaker a wage assuming he arrives.

As to making a saving by moving another player into a marquee slot, that doesn't work unless you think the club is ready to pay one of the existing squad a big wedge. In my opinion none of them including Bateman are marquee level players. If the club uses the spot vacated by Tomkins just to get part of one of our existing squads wage off the cap then the management has really lost the plot. It needs to use that slot to sign another genuine marquee player from outside the club, preferably a 7.

I can't see the club doing that though. Wane for some inexplicable reason thinks Powell is good enough and then there is the fact the club clearly wanted to reduce the wage bill by offering Sam T less for 2019 so I just don't think they have any intention of stumping up what it would take to sign and NRL half back.

It it would not surprise me in the least if Hardaker is announced as the marquee signing. I don't think the club will have offered him peanuts to join despite the drugs ban. It may be less than Sam T would have cost overall but I would not be surprised at all if he was announced as a marquee signing.



Don't think so. As others have said Hardaker is a different kind of player than Sam T and unless we improve the half backs the team will go backwards. If things don't work out playing-wise I can see Hardaker doing a Scott Taylor and getting homesick for Yorkshire.

Of those three players you mention even though his form is arguably the poorest of the three Gildart is the one we can least afford to lose because centres in Wigan are as rare as hens teeth. I'd be disappointed to lose Sutton because I think he will go on to be a top class prop but we could cope. I don't think Bateman is irreplaceable either though again I'd prefer it if he stayed.

Trying to be realistic and accepting we do not live in an ideal world so there is no chance of another proper centre to replace Sarge and a senior prop being added to the squad (which I think we also need) then if we kept Gildart. signed Hardaker and signed a new 7 then I think we'd be OK next season but that is the minimum required for me and I think I will be disappointed over the new 7.

Given the comments by various posters about hardaker and how he fits in and who else is off contract I think it makes it even more obvious what the club should have done is as soon as Les Cats came sniffing that they nailed Sam T down to a new deal and did not start negotiations with the ploy of "We'd like you to stay but for less money than we agreed to for the 2019 season".

But they offered him marquee money so the same amount would be on the cap, it’s just money saved by the club not halting any other player for the cap, garbage but of business Rads was a great player but he’s been very poor in his role.

There's a Surprise

And the above is not. We can always rely on you for a snide comment.

Dave

I could have wrote a 10page essay on everything that you're insinuating about Wigan and it's management and your presumptions that they are completely in the wrong here.
But it won't make a difference, you've been intent on shooting them down for 1 reason or another for the last 3/4 years.

I said on a previous post the other week that I wouldn't want to be KR or IL right now as there will be major surgery required before the season is out and presumably during the close season.
ST for me is a pity as we will miss him a lot more than some people are suggesting however, value for money his demands may have been a bridge too far for the board which I can accept and understand as long as we land a half back to cover where we are already light and will be much worse once ST exits.
What I am enjoying is the additional volume of traffic on site which the latest ins and outs is generating I just hope that at the end of the transactions the squad is enhanced rather than depleted which with current availability and salary cap restrictions will be some ask.
A minimum for me is at least one prop, a new second row to replace JB, a playmaker who is also a kicker (from hand and for conversions) and one I hope we don't need is a centre to replace Gildart.

When I said the young lads I meant Bateman and Gildart (assuming Sutton is off).

Clearly losing all four is a disaster and as I say huge questions would need to be asked and possible changes in our management made because that won’t be acceptable.

I’ve questioned the management of contracts in the past and it’s still a massive concern IMO

Tomkins two-part interviewWhy he's leaving, what happens if Catalans are relegated. Telling Wane, his legacy & ambitions. https://www.wigantoday.net/sport/rugby- ... -1-9166123

Tomkins two-part interviewWhy he's leaving, what happens if Catalans are relegated. Telling Wane, his legacy & ambitions. https://www.wigantoday.net/sport/rugby- ... -1-9166123