: Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:25 pm  

Orford will stay at Manly, I'm led to believe his financial demands exceed what any English club is prepared to pay.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:28 pm  

Last Son of Wigan wrote:

True.

By why get a 31/32 yrar old Orford when in 2 years time we'll need a new halfback?

We need a long term partnership at Wigan.

I dont understand this

We would be in the same position if we signed Long. so whys your opinion different towards Orford

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:33 pm  

there aint half some back peddling going on in this thread

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:36 pm  

What about signing Shenton now and moving Gleeson to 6. has always been good at standoff when i have seen him play.

either that or move Phelps to 6 and get an exellent fullback.

I still think a Prop is a must, Mr webb will do just nicely.

also if we were to confirm the signing of say Webb or o'meely in the next few weeks. would the ball start rolling with regards to the home office sorting out his visa application?. purley so we could see if it would be granted or not. this would allow us more time to search for a possible replacement.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:02 pm  

tugglesf78 wrote:

What about signing Shenton now and moving Gleeson to 6. has always been good at standoff when i have seen him play.

either that or move Phelps to 6 and get an exellent fullback.

I still think a Prop is a must, Mr webb will do just nicely.

also if we were to confirm the signing of say Webb or o'meely in the next few weeks. would the ball start rolling with regards to the home office sorting out his visa application?. purley so we could see if it would be granted or not. this would allow us more time to search for a possible replacement.

Is Shenton available?

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:14 pm  

Cruncher wrote:

Is Shenton available?

i very much doubt it

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:18 pm  

[Gareth] wrote:

i very much doubt it

That's what I thought.

I suppose that any player is available if you're prepared to offer their club a big enough transfer fee. But given that Shenton's comfy at Cas, and we have other positions to fill as priorities, I can't see us going along that expensive and torturous route.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:28 pm  

Cruncher wrote:

Is Shenton available?

I heard a rumour on here while back that he could be however with most things on here I have doubts to its validity. It was more of a hypothetical post from me anyway. Saying that surely it would be less expensive to sign him from his current contract that it would be for the like of Thurston, Orford, Lockyer or the like.

The point I am trying to make is that we have 2 people in our squad who will be here next year in Gleeson and Phelps (to a lesser extent Pryce) all of which have played 6 during their careers (with varying amounts of experience). With the current group of forwards we have we will never see a true reflection of what the aforementioned players could do in the halfbacks because we rarely win the ruck and have the momentum, therefore robbing our backline of the space required to make a mark on the game. With the cash channelled into signing one or two world class Props and releasing one of our multitudes of 2nd rowers. This would in turn allow Prescott to move into the back row (a position i feel he would be more suited to because of his size and speed).
This would give us a better picture of what is required from our halfbacks. I fear even if we were to sign a top halfback we would never see the best of him because of our poor pack.

I mentioned Shenton because this would allow us to move Gleeson to 6 and because Shenton is (for my money anyway) one of the biggest prospect s in SL. Not to mention the fact that we do not give Gleeson the service he needs ATM (this is another argument tought!!)
Likewise if we were to splash the cash on a world class fullback we could allow Phelps a shot at the title.
Basically we have possible have these players sitting on our doorstep however we will never know until we sort the props out.

or we could scrub the idea of playing a new 6 and resign Smith on a larger contract. therfore saving cash on a 6 and use it for an extra Prop.

with smith at 7 and sam at 6 we have a true partnership that could last a long time. they compliment each other verywell IMO

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:48 pm  

wigan_knight wrote:

I dont understand this

We would be in the same position if we signed Long. so whys your opinion different towards Orford

I only stated getting Long would be a good signing if we also brought in Myler.

Orford would want more cash.

Regardless, the whole point was that Orford won't come to Wigan. Wigan offered Long a deal.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:49 pm  

wigan_knight wrote:

I dont understand this

We would be in the same position if we signed Long. so whys your opinion different towards Orford

I only stated getting Long would be a good signing if we also brought in Myler.

Orford would want more cash.

Regardless, the whole point was that Orford won't come to Wigan. Wigan offered Long a deal.