Re: Charnley : Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:32 pm  

Well, in a way, but Eden was, if anything, less successful than Burgess in the NRL. When they both went to Australia, I don't think there's much doubt that Burgess was the better player, but Eden now is fit and confident, and Burgess has looked neither.

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:23 pm  

moto748 wrote:

Well, in a way, but Eden was, if anything, less successful than Burgess in the NRL. When they both went to Australia, I don't think there's much doubt that Burgess was the better player, but Eden now is fit and confident, and Burgess has looked neither.

Burgess has been pretty much injured all season

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:39 pm  

Bulked up too much lost his greatest asset which was his blistering pace, rather have Charnley of last season.

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:52 pm  

Pieman wrote:

Bulked up too much lost his greatest asset which was his blistering pace, rather have Charnley of last season.

And the season before? Not a chance. He was kept out by Manfredi and rightly so. I'd have a fit Burgess over last seasons Charnley all day long.

[DaveO]

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:15 pm  

Cruncher wrote:

I'm starting to agree. As I've mentioned in another thread, I think this 'coming home clause' is nothing more than a safety net for players who are not as committed to the Wigan cause as we'd like them to be.

I think it seemed like a good idea at the time - gave us a kind of insurance policy against losing too many of our young stars, but it must also make it an easier decision for players who are thinking about leaving, because it means they can simply come back if it all goes wrong. But what does that really say about the players' attitude to Wigan? Not much, in truth - which may explain why none of them, thus far, have done anything of note on their return

Have we re-signed any player who left for positive reasons? I mean by that most if not all seem to have left contracts early because they were either homesick or things were not going so well. That in itself should not mean they are poor when they get back but they all seem to have had the stuffing knocked out of them. RU and the NRL have taken players off us at their peak or for young players who have impressed but none of them have returned having lit up the places they went to and having been on top form before they came back.

I also think this re-signing idea makes the club lazy in its scouting. If we decided we needed a new 7 instead of Matty Smith was TL the only player we considered? Was there a need to re-sign Lee Mossop? I think part of the reason was IL felt like he was going to get lynched if he didn't try and do something about what seemed like a constant exodus of players at one point but the effect has seemingly been to limit where the club looks for players in a desire to prove this can work and that they do indeed come back. I am sure if Budgie or Sam T had come back and signed for Leeds or whoever there would have been a meltdown so he was between a rock and a hard place but going forward I think we can say this idea has not worked and the club should have the confidence to say "no" to a player who wants to return if they don't fit in with what we need.

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:38 pm  

Bigredwarrior wrote:

And the season before? Not a chance. He was kept out by Manfredi and rightly so. I'd have a fit Burgess over last seasons Charnley all day long.

was made a scapegoat by Wane......a fir Burgess from this year? Never in the memory of man

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:45 pm  

For what it's worth if charnley hadn't left burgess wouldn't have been asked to return,Joe wasn't even the first choice replacement.The mighty Wigan being knocked back .Charnleys weight under maguire was fourteen and a half stone sixteen and a half stone under Wane as requested by the club, power required over speed.

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:59 pm  

Whitworth wrote:

For what it's worth if charnley hadn't left burgess wouldn't have been asked to return,Joe wasn't even the first choice replacement.The mighty Wigan being knocked back .Charnleys weight under maguire was fourteen and a half stone sixteen and a half stone under Wane as requested by the club, power required over speed.

What's your weight now?

Re: Charnley : Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:33 pm  

Pieman wrote:

was made a scapegoat by Wane......a fir Burgess from this year? Never in the memory of man

He really was! He was treated appallingly by Wane when he publicly humiliated him and left him out of the side. His form wasn't great but he was hung out to dry and it's no wonder he left.

Re: Charnley : Wed Sep 20, 2017 2:54 am  

You see far more of Burgess than I do, but he was starting to go really well in the NRL at the end of last season. He joined the wrong team in the first place in the Roosters, but it took him a while to adjust to the physicality of the NRL. By the end of the season with the switch to Souths he looked far more comfortable - particularly on kick returns where he was far too easily pushed back at the start of the year.

Eden by contrast never looked anything other than a lightweight in the NRL. He did't get many games for the Broncos, but the ones I saw he lost every collision and looked likely to drop the ball every tackle. Hardakaer looked just as weak for the Panthers, but had the 2015 or 2017 version gone over may have done better.

The NRL is just more physical for backs than SL, and whilst most British forwards adjust, our outside backs seem to struggle.