He was crap though.

Isn't it true though that most of our overseas recruits do not suffer a slow start? Renouf, Dallas, McCormak and Barret took weeks not months to show the form we expected. Even Gene Miles who got a lot of stick early on became breathtaking as the season progressed. That can not be said of Riddell.

You have named two there who are going back a bit in terms of when they were recruited and Richards was played out of position and looked a different player once on the wing anyway.

I tend to think its much simpler. Good players are up to speed in a matter of weeks, poor ones are not. And before everyone says "Craig Smith" the exception does not disprove the rule IMO.

Going back further did Florimo just never "settle in" or was it he just wasn't that good? Has "not settled in" become a euphemism for poor player?

Dave

Riddell had a very slow start to the season and just seemed to want to distribute the ball from dummy half and do little else but over these past couple of months i think he's been playing some pretty good stuff. He's taking the line on more and seems to have upped his workrate. I thought he was pretty quiet in his first spell on Friday but in the second spell he caused no end of problems for Wire with his running out of dummy half.

Overall i think he's been decent but there is room for improvment. I hope and think he can improve. If we suprisingly signed a halfback for nextyear leaving us with 5 halfs and hookers for 4 places i reckon that will really bring the best out of everybody(we may need a new coach if players are to be picked on form though).

Riddell could have abit of extra help back this weekend in McIlorum.

He expects to be fit for selection this weekend according to the WEP.

The weekly scapegoat award comes full circle.

Craig Smith had problems with his ankle and eventually got it sorted out and was a much better player after he went under the knife.

Pat Richards probably came into the side at the worst possible time and i dont think he was the only player to suffer under Ian Millward.

I dont think it i just Wigan though, Leeds seem to have had similar problems with some of their oversea's signings but its difficlut to know if it is because they are unsettled or are just not up to the standard required, probably a bit of both.

From what i have seen of Mark Riddell though he just doesnt look up to standard, there is no excuse for some of his passing.

Stuart Raper always maintained that most Aussies needed a season to adjust to the different style of play in SL compared to the NRL.
Barrett and Lyon didn't but it appears lesser mortals do!

IMO he's a huge improvement on the previous 9 - not that i'm knocking mickey but he was pretty limited - and he gives far less pens away!!

His passing on the whole (apart from a couple of dodgy ones this week) is far better than mickeys (and mcIllorum's for that matter who gives far too many forward passes).

I do think he needs to put himself into the game more often and ask more questions of the defence. Overall summary; getting better but still room for improvement. Needs to work on fitness.

As stated elswhere, if we worked harder off the ball it would help him and any other 9 too.

It's not his fault that our recruitment doesn't appear to have accounted for the fact that McIllorum and tommy might have a strong claim for the 9 spot too.

Mark Riddell is playing to a standard that I expect, which is good.

Then again, his game would dramatically improve if he takes the line on much more. Over a short distance he is deceptively quick and he can evade defenders when he runs at a straight angle. He is also quite hard to put down and is able to produce a good offload.

However, to do the above is energy sapping and he is also expected to distribute at every ruck, so fitness is a key attribute to be a top class hooker. With confidence of completing a full Super League season as well as a big pre-season, I think we'll see a hugely improved Mark Riddell in 2010.

I had no idea what standard he would play at because I knew nothing of him. If you consider this standard good or good enough I think you are easily pleased. He isn't a patch on some of better hookers we have had in recent times. He is not a patch on Newton wheh he was with us and going further back Robbie McCormack was miles better and of course delivered in his one and only season with us without having to "settle in" for 95% of it.

Also the idea Riddell will improve his fitness, which is what I assume you expect based on your second paragraph above is based on what? His dedication to fitness this year?





I think you are gong to be disappointed.

Dave

I think personally it is impossible to apply a rule to the time a player takes to settle in.

Each player is different and each team is different that they are brought in to.

To use McCormack as an example and say it should be the same for Riddell is a bit of a strech in my opinion. McCormack came into a good settled side with bags of go forward who genearlly won the midfield arm wrestle, he has a field day off the quick PTB's we generated at the time. Riddell generally has had sod all momentum to work from and a lack of options.

I think he has been a slow burner, his performances initially were poor but he has built on that and generally of late has been playing well, i think his injury in the semi was another major factor in the loss.

I would also say it should be much easier for players like Props, centres and wingmen to settle as they do not have to marshall the team and fit to a teams style of play whereas a half or hooker does.

Regards Barrett I maintain that we never saw the best of him in SL certainly not for a consistent spell as he never really got to play how he naturally would like to play apart from when the gameplan went out of the window.

He needs to hit the ground running in 2010, but i am confident he can really push us forward and lead us round the pitch, which will be boosted by matters out of his hands if they happen, ie coaching situation and new signings.

I know you do not agree but personally I think he has been a significant improvement over Higham and has brought much more balance to the team.

What has Terry Newton or Robbie McCormack (Who last played for Wigan 11 years ago) got to do with Mark Riddell's general game and attributes?

By all means, I can understand people criticizing Riddell but it's pointless brining up players from totally different eras.

If every player is an improvement on the player he replaced then we are going in the right direction.

I think the majority would agree that Riddell is an improvement on Higham.

I think they are going to be disappointed as well, frankly!!

Look, I buy the argument that sometimes players take a while to settle in. Pat Richards is a perfect example. Poor in his first season and now one of the top backs in SL and a 1000 point scoring club legend.

On the other hand, Pat wasn't carrying a lot of excess weight in that first season.....

I would have more patience with a player who looked like he was working hard in training but just couldn't deliver on the field, whether that's because he or his family are homesick or he's just having trouble adapting to the game here and the club set up.

And as for Robbie McCormack, if he was playing now at the standard he played at in that cameo season he had with us, he'd be the best hooker in SL.

Agreed as is Phelps on Mathers & Gleeson on whoever ended up at centre.

When did the current era begin?

If was talking about hookers from the era of the 3 point try I would agree but both Newton and MCormack played Super League for Wigan in the grand final era. Both played under the 10m rule. To suggest they played in some by gone era is not correct IMO.

Both were better players for us than Riddell has been so far and McCormack was up to speed right away.

Dave

Is Riddell better than KFC, Clarke, Buderous, Randall etc. His SL counterparts? That is what counts and if he isn't (and I don't think he is better than many at all) then being better than someone you didn't rate doesn't count for much does it?

Dave

I saw Riddell play in the NRL some years ago at St. George. If memory serves, he did much more from dummy half - taking the ball up a couple of steps trying to wrong-foot the markers before offloading (as Newton used to do at Wigan). He also had a decent short kicking game.

I've been pretty disappointed with him so far. He hasn't done that much wrong bar a few dodgy passes but he hasn't really caught the eye either. Perhaps our one-out/totally predictable attacking lines don't help him much - but often he seems content to throw a short ball out. He certainly doesn't create any headaches for the markers.

On the other hand, I have to admit we often look much more lively when either MclLorum and Tommy are playing hooker. But that could be partly down to the fact that we often push the pace of the play-the-ball once Riddell has been substituted.

Dave,
He is an improvement on what we've had for the last three years. He is better than Clarke. Boderus has been a waste of a spot, (how many games has he played)

Riddell has done o.k.
You didn't defend him last week when Wigan scored ALL their tries when he was on the pitch, but are very quick to attack him for ONE bad pass on Friday.



I suggest you come into the South Stand bar after the game v Hull and see if he is really fat. I'll guarantee you'll find he isn't.
[urlhttp://www.superleague.co.uk/statistics_player.php?hs1=2009&hp1=2075&hs2=2009&hp2=526&stat=tries&season=2009[/url

He's not been as good as I expected but he hasn't been as bad as some people have made him out to be.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but Tommy L is a far better hooker which makes me wish we had signed a scrum half instead. I was actually calling for us to get rid of TL till I discovered how good a hooker he is. I still maintain we will not win a trophy with TL as scrum half.

And Riddell v Cunningham


[urlhttp://www.superleague.co.uk/statistics_player.php?hs1=2009&hp1=2075&hs2=2009&hp2=359&stat=tries&season=2009[/url

Look at Cunninghams missed tackles, errors and penalties.


He's nowhere near as bad as Dave is suggesting.

Riddell could find the cure for cancer and David would still complain as he replaced his beloved Michael Higham.

Smith was injured at first (ankle, I think), then he was magnificent.

Rogue,
For some reason I couldn't reply to your post inviting Dave to go to the South Stand to see that Riddell isn't so fat.
I keep imagining you carrying one of those mirrors from the fair ground that distorts the body shape and Riddell innocently walking in front of it.
Then Feka pushing him out of the way.

I just wasn't very good ...