After seeing the Squad for Saturday, im going to say Leeds by 18, Hughes and Goulding in the centres against Hardaker and Watkins scares me, I have a feeling Leeds' back line will run riot.

Though I've been counselling patience, I've said it before and I'll say it again - I think Joel was a massive loss for us. Far more so than many seemed to think at the time. True, he wasn't a world-beating centre, but his departure has removed speed, strength, aggression and defensive quality from of a part of the field where we were already quite thin in these aspects.

From what I was told Tomkins would have been back in the pack anyway this year as Wane saw him very much as a 2nd row.

With Carmont & Goulding available, probably, but I think he'd have been our first back-up centre ahead of Gelling or Hughes, and would have played there now, while Carmont is out.

Hard to disagree. Even if he wasn't truly world-class, he was definitely SL quality in the position - solid in defence, and not exactly slow or lacking attacking ability - and he had come through the junior ranks and embedded himself in the team and the playing system as the first choice right centre. Replacing a solid, settled team member isn't always straightforward and, even if you've got someone better as a replacement, it can take a wee while for them to bed in. It's too early to panic, but it's a change that the squad has to get used to. It's bound to go variable for a bit, just as it did when Joel took over the position.

Come off it man! Luaki was garbage at Hull! He will be garbage for us. Take your rose tinted spectacles off.

Come off it man? Just because somebody doesnt do well at one club doesnt mean he wont succeed at another. Anybody judging a new player after just one game is clearly a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

So on your theory, we should go and sign a player who hasn't done well at one club and hope he does well at ours?

And you say I'm a sandwich short of a picnic?

Surely in order to succeed, a club must go and sign players who are actually any good? Or does that make too much sense?

Luaki is woeful. He was woeful at Hull and will be woeful here. Anyone trying to defend him must immediately remove their rose tinted spectacles and get with the real world.

And Lauaki had a good start to his Hull career so he's not always been garbage.

I'm not sure we'll get much out of him but he deserves a chance and anybody could be forgiven for being frustrated at Hull!

Just to clarify - I am not judging him after one game. I'm judging him on his whole SL career which, may I add, has been nothing short of rubbish.

Just because a player doesnt do well at one club doesnt make them garbage.

Your saying we should never sign any player who hasnt done well at every club he has been at? I think its you who need to get with the real world!

If the coaching staff see something in a player which another club isnt getting the best out of why shouldnt we go and sign him?

Wigan have had a record of improving players games over the past couple of years.

If we see a player that has the raw materials to be good enough for us but isn't producing at the moment then who are we to question the club if they want to sign him? The coaching staff have the belief that they can get the best out of players and it's encouraging to see them back themselves.

I agree but the thing is he doesn't had the 'raw materials'. For me, he is probably the worst Wigan signing since Pryce.

In relation to 'raw material' that's why I fully agree with the Gil Dudson signing, he looks like he could be a real brilliant prop.

Lauaki must have something afterall he's been selected for the New Zealand side in the past and he did start his career off well at Hull.

I'm the first to admit it's a strange signing but he's done ok (no more then that) so far and he deserves a chance. Outside of Pryce we've not got too much wrong in terms of signing for a while now.

Wigan have always done this never mind over the last couple of years. Payers like Sam Pananpa and Billy McInty were players who improved when they came here. However, crucially, they were already good players at their existing clubs. We made them better.

What I can [inever[/i recall Wigan having ever done is sign a poor player and turn him into a good player.



The reason we should not sign him is we don't have to take the risk.

Just what is the point in taking on a 27 year old player who should be at least playing well enough to spark the clubs interest when in fact the player is playing poorly? Lauaki should be at the peak of his career not a player we brought in as a work in progress. By this logic we should just sign all the dross and in a season or two we will have a championship side again. It just does not work like that and never has here at Wigan.

Any poor players who we have signed (such as some of the ones in 2006) were not retained. By now Oliver Wilkes and Jordan James should be the mainstay of our pack if it were different.