My biggest concern with the current squad and moreover coaching is our tendency to add players or ask players in the squad to play or be capable of playing several positions rather than concentrating on 1 position.

It has been mentioned on another thread about Rocky Hampshire potentially being held back developmentally because we are asking him to be a utility back. We comment on our lack of size or our need to put a big pack together and bring in a secondrow/prop in Patrick who doesn't really have that size.

When we brought Clubb in we clearly wanted to use him as a utility forward and it looks like now we have accepted he is a Prop and have conditioned him that way given the extra size he has put on.

Powell is another, who hasn't really been given a position to really build on.

Looking at the succession plan IFL spoke about at the Forum a lot of players seemed to be floating between positions.

I really think we need to identify a position and pathway as early as possible for our players so we can specialise earlier and develop them for that position.

First team rugby in my opinion is not the arena to still be experimenting and deciding on what position is best for a player.

Mentioned it at the game today. Hampshire looks all at sea at fullback and Joel Tomkins is never a centre. I'd have given Hampshire at least 40 mins at 6 today and played Gildart for the full game.

In saying that I have no real concerns. We've been dumb in these two friendlies and hugely rusty but there's 6 or 7 players to come back in with Lockers being the man that glues us together. We've bombed chance after chance in these friendlies and the bounce of the ball hasn't gone for us but I'd rather that now then in two weeks at Widnes.

Probably the most alarming this I've picked up from both games is George Williams at 6. I know we like to play a flat shape in attack but both opposition defences have pinpointed him and got out the line and his impact has been minimal. For me he is best when taking on the line but without more depth this isn't going to be possible.

By no means am I saying he won't succeed there and I fully appreciate that it takes time to gel with your HB partner but it is slightly concerning 2 weeks before SL starts.

Regarding Joel, what happened to his defence today? Percival had a field day - never a rugby league centre

I totally agree, i believe it is a major concern. We are experimenting with player careers which could ruin them going forward.

Hampshire - Clearly always been a half back (6 or 7) and being forced to play or learn to play full back at a time when he is trying to break into the team. Why start him at full back for first half then bring him back on at half back in the second half?? If the coaching staff believe he is going to be a success at full back then he needs to play a row of games because at the moment he is in for one game then out for about 5 games. I know we have Bowen but would you risk losing Hampshire for the sake of 30+ full back. Look at Saints they moved Lomax to full back and moved to Wellens to a utility player on bench or not in the 17 so Lomax can get the experience playing that position. My main concern is Hampshire could leave because he wants to play in the halves and recently we have seen we are bit slow to re-sign players. People will think they have these types of discussions but you ask any young lad trying to break into the first team they always say they will play anywhere.

Williams - Also been a half back most of his career to what I have seen or heard. So why ruin him last season at hooker?? He played 9 for 2/3 of season and then moved him back to half back and Powell to 9 towards the end of the season. The start of this season Wane gives Williams the No 6 shirt which to me would indicate that he is the first choice for that position this season, so why did Wane move him to 9 on Sunday for the last 15 mins when Mcllourm was still on the field at loose forward?? Really really annoys me! It indicates he doesn't know his best team and his players best positions.

Wane as done this in the past and as ruined some players for example Jack Hughes...... I know not world beater but broke into the team as a second rower who still needs to learn the position at the top level but Wane moved him to centre giving him the No 4 jersey and his career as gone backwards ever since. Gelling is another example, came to this country as a winger..... very raw but one year he is seen as a possible second row option then back to wing given No 5 jersey then moved to centre and given No 3 jersey.

I know there will be a few responses saying there as been successful changes of positions but not young players (apart from Sam T) at the top level it has worked for players like Inglis and Lockyer but they was at the top in the position and the change was brought about to improve them.

Players get a chance when there is a vacancy in the team. In Jack Hughes case there was a vacancy at 4, there wasn't one at SR because Faz was there. If the coach thinks he is the best option available to him then he picks him there, because his job is to win games. The player would rather play anywhere just to get in the team, rather than wait for a chance in his preferred position. That chance may never come.

In Lomax's case Saints didn't move him to get experience they moved him because he was better than Wellens there. At the moment Hampshire is nowhere near as good as Bowen, pretty simple really. There is a vacancy at SO which Wane has given to Williams.

Gelling was never a winger. He came over as centre, but at the time Goulding and Carmont played there and because of injury there was a chance on the wing. Because of his attributes the coach thought he would be a better bet than the other candidates.

So on Thursday with Sarginson and Thornley out injured do you play Gildart a centre, who is clearly not ready, or do you play a seasoned pro (Tomkins or Charnley) out of position - thus weakening their usual position - or do you pick a youngster (Bateman) with more experience of first team, who doesn't usually play centre. Not easy being a coach is it??

I understand the argument regarding Hampshire not being a fullback, but if the coach thinks that's his position then so be it. He should however be given a run of games there but as stated above is he better than Bowen? I think Wane needs to decide if he's willing to accept a few mistakes from Rocky. If he is start him at full back at Widnes and leave him there for a good 5 games.

There is also no point in giving hampshire 20 mins or so at 6. What we need to do is play Smith and Williams for the full 80 in all the pre season games to get some cohesion.

Just a thought, do you think Rocky is being given all these runs at FB as he'll start there against Widnes? Wane might be worried about their pitch and Bowens knees.

Some positives on this...
On Clubb, it makes perfect sense to turn him into a prop, given his power, aggression and lack of RL grounding.
Rocky is so much better at 6 than at 1 it is ridiculous.
Gelling has really settled down and stopped floating (I think he was also considered to be a second row when we signed him?)
I always thought Sarg was a 1, but he has far far exceeded my expectations at centre.

Some negatives...
Hughes was poorly served, I agree.
I just don't see Williams as a 6 for us, mostly because the one attribute we need at 6 - with Smith, Lockers and Mac moving us around) is a dangerous running game. And I don't see that with him.
I have never liked Joel as a centre, and would prefer Josh/Budgie/Bateman ahead of him. Though I don't feel that strongly, and he has had his moments.

I'm expecting Hampshire to play fullback at Widnes. Wane doesn't like that pitch and has been very wary of putting SOME players on it over the years.

Yes I'm pretty sure that Lockers hasn't played on it yet either. In the first season on it, he rested Lockers, Sam, Tommy and Micky Mac. Finch was captain and we lost.

Need to get off to a good start this year. Huddersfield are our regular season bogey team and won't be easy in Round 2.

Yeh agreed there is only certain positions that have become available but the players being changed for that position don't fit in my opinion.

I just dont understand some of the changes.......and on sunday was the prime example.

How could Lomax be better in that position until he played there?

If Bowen as such bad knees then he wont play at Widnes but lets all be prepared for Hampshire to make mistakes that could cost us the game is positional play at full back was all wrong and he was tormented by Wilkin and I can see Kev Broen doing the same.

I do see why Wane is putting Hampshire there for his speed etc but I think there is more to him than just that.

I'm a great believer in players earning their place. I don't think that it's right to give someone a run of games in a position to give them experience, just because they show potential. I really don't care about age. Players mature at different rates. Danny Bough being a prime example.

I made the point earlier that I think we should have signed him and who is to say that Danny won't still be playing in 3 or 4 years time? Over the last 2 or 3 years he's been consistently the best Half Back in Super League, so why wouldn't Wigan want to sign the best? In 3 or 4 years Hampshire, Williams & Powell could all be long gone. Casualties of the game, like many before, who failed to make it after showing promise.

I agree with you, I can't for the life of me see Ryan Hampshire as a full back, but then I guess Shaun Wane has earned the right to make mistakes and not have his judgement called into question by the likes of you and I (though it won't stop us!).