: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:14 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Would you be happy with Sam, Ainscough, Goulding and Smith all in the backline on Saturday?

I named a team in the Ainscough thread and didn't include Goulding so i suppose i'd have to say no. It's nothing personal against Goulding but i'd worry about our defence with all those lads in.

I put Bailey in at centre which to me would really help out our defence on that right hand side thats looked so leaky.

: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:14 pm  

noble must think s tomkins ok but not a 1st teamer! he scored 5 tries in is debut get S TOMKINS PLAYING NOW

: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:20 pm  

Lets get them all in tomkins,ainscough,mossop,farrall if were going to lose lets lose with pride but know were building for the future.


COME ON WIGAN !!

: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:21 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

I named a team in the Ainscough thread and didn't include Goulding so i suppose i'd have to say no. It's nothing personal against Goulding but i'd worry about our defence with all those lads in.

I put Bailey in at centre which to me would really help out our defence on that right hand side thats looked so leaky.

That's a major concern of mine and why I would start with O'loughlin at standoff with Sam on the bench.

: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:34 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

I named a team in the Ainscough thread and didn't include Goulding so i suppose i'd have to say no. It's nothing personal against Goulding but i'd worry about our defence with all those lads in.

I put Bailey in at centre which to me would really help out our defence on that right hand side thats looked so leaky.

Great minds think alike . Been saying this for weeks now. You can't have Smith and Goulding on the same side of the pitch in defence. It's just asking to be punished.

Re: sam tomkins and noble : Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:53 pm  

pk wrote:

he doesnt have final say over transfer policy

Is this definate?

As for Tomkins. Bench for him on Sat.

: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:54 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

I put Bailey in at centre which to me would really help out our defence on that right hand side thats looked so leaky.

I too would go with this, it seems like a sensible option and one in which will help if/when Smith is targeted.

: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:56 pm  

Ancient & Loyal wrote:

I too would go with this, it seems like a sensible option and one in which will help if/when Smith is targeted.

It is, Bailey in the centre is exactly what we need currently.

Re: sam tomkins and noble : Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:58 pm  

AJ wrote:

Is this definate?

As for Tomkins. Bench for him on Sat.

The way I took it from the fans forum was:

If Noble wants a player and Lenegan says we can't afford him we don't get him.

On the flip side if Lenegan wants a player and Noble doesn't want him we don't get him.

So basically it sounds like they both have to like the player and he has to be 'affordable'.

The only issue here is what is deemed to be 'affordable' because it the moment we just seem to sign squad fillers and no one of any real world class quality. I know the squad has to have balance but for me I would sacrifice two average players such as Mathers and Coley for example to bring in a world class prop/centre/stand off.

: Wed Feb 25, 2009 11:02 pm  

This is the problem that seems to be coming up with IL, everyone we sign seems to be a cheap version, on some kind of deal that benefits the club.

Yes, it has finally given us a big squad, but we now have more numbers than quality.