That for me blew any chances of trusting mamagers in modern day rugby league. I STILL cannot understand the reason why Wane dropped 5 top players for the Widens game and 4 top players for the Bradford game and also alowing Gelling to play about 12 games and not realising that he was poop. Tony Smith at Warrington did the same thing for there games away to salford and london

they got more of a hiding than Wigan did.
And as to Lenagan expecting to reach at least 1 final a year he will have to cough up again.

For sure. We need a quality centre and a quality prop or we are settling for mediocrity next season. Time to spend some of that huge transfer money we have received in the last few years.

Have we not done that already?
Matty Smith
Blake Green
Scott Taylor????

What transfer money have we received? I can only remember us paying it out on people like Fielden, Gleeson, Smuth, Blake etc.

I think Farrell and Tomkins are the only ones. Got quite a bit in both cases though.

£240K for Joel Tomkins.

Wane should have done it more often. Tony Smith rested players throughout the year and at times Wire got caught on when resting too many players but how much did that bother Smith? He couldn't have cared less.

The mistake wasn't resting too many players or too many all at once, it was actually making it a target to win the league when no other coach even cared about it. I've little doubt that had Warrington set out to finish top they'd have done so easily but that also could have hurt their bid to win all three trophies.

The weekly rounds mean nothing. The defeat to Widnes meant nothing although it did highlight some weaknesses of certain players and it did show how some of the senior players who aren't start players coped with more pressure on their shoulders.

I also think that Wane should have rested players more often.
The problem was that we lost at Widnes and should have won even with a weakened team. Wane was rebuked for this and therefore didn't repeat it.
I hope next season that we rest players as often as is necessary with an aim to finish in 5th place or above.
We will then have a nice warm up game in the first round of the play-offs against the team that finishes eighth (mediocre), play the 4th team away and reach our peak against the 1st or 2nd away in the semi. We would also have a better chance of winning the challenge cup. Leeds, in finishing 5th, and getting to two finals is much better than winning the league.
I will still be getting my season ticket next year and won't complain if Wane rests players and we lose some matches as a result.

Did he? They only lost one more game than us and we pipped them by a single point to the league. He can't have made wholesale changes more often than Wane did and got caught out as a result otherwise they would have suffered more losses to weak sides. I think he had one game where he rested several players but that was [iafter[/i they had won the cup which is not how Wane managed it. Smith may have rotated his squad more but I don't think he rested 6 players after six games into the competition or made a habit of doing so throughout the season.



Tony Smith rotated players when it was sensible to do so. Wane didn't. No one needed resting after 6 games v Widnes. In 2011 Madge was criticised for not blooding any youngsters but he would not have been thanked for sticking in half a dozen at once.

As to the idea the weekly rounds mean little so Wane should have done rested 4 or 6 players more often that is not possible. Certainly not if as Wane said the league was a priority but also because if he had treated the league in that way then no one would watch it! Do you think IL wants to fans to treat the league with the same disdain as you are suggesting the coach should? It would cost the club a fortune in lost ticket sales.

That said Wane could still have had his cake and eaten it. If he hadn't rested so many players v Widnes and Bradford and taken the points off two weak sides by playing stronger teams he could have rested players at the business end of the season when they [iare[/i tired as the league would have been in the bag. Instead we had players busting a gut to give us the comeback of the season v HKR to win the league.

And not I am not saying a coach has to play his strongest side every week. Put in one or two players v weaker opposition, not six and you can still blood some players. You need to do that more often as well and I am sure this is what Tony Smith did. Murphy played once and didn't get another game until the semi-final for example. That was daft.

A lesson Wane needs to learn is not only can you not make 4 or 6 changes against weaker teams and still expect to win, he also needs to realise there is little value in doing so. Playing one or two younger players in the side alongside the seasoned pros and regular 1st team players will do them far more good than running around in a team where nearly half the team doesn't know the plays and what to do. You get young players getting game time and sensible more frequent squad rotation.

If he rests 6 players at once again and we lose I will complain. If he plays one or two younger players against the bottom sides and weaker teams we will probably win anyway and we will still get squad rotation. But if we don't win with a couple of kids in the side I won't complain.

If he had done this v Widnes and had we still lost he wouldn't have been criticised for doing so IMO.

If we win the cup and he then decides to rest half a dozen players to try and kick on and win the GF I won't complain about that either.

There is such a difference between what Wane did this season and what he ought to have done with regard to squad rotation.

To be quite honest I'm baffled at the "Wane Out" bandwaggonjumperoners that have suddenly decided to get all shouty. If we swap & change managers every five minutes we'll just go backwards very quickly.

The man's only been in charge one year and the only real mistake I can see he's made is not evolving our style quickly enough when it became obvious most of the other teams had figured us out.

The Widnes game was a lesson in arrogance that I think the whole squad (& I include both playing & coaching staff in that) learned and took note of. There were embarrassing blips where for one reason or another they played like they'd been on the pie & ale 'til 3 in the morning, but looking at the last 9 months as a whole I see no reason to either panic or jerk either knee.

I'm quite surprised at Wane getting stick for resting players against Bradford. If I'm not mistaken at that time it was potentially Bradfords last game. The Bradford team wanted to ensure that if it was their last match they were gonna win no matter what.

The Widnes game is/ was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. If Sam, Finchy, Tommy, Lockers or any body else came out of that match injured for any length of time, we would be saing why didn't he rest players more often.

I think he should have rotated the squad more and I also think he should have given more game time to Logan Tomkins for an example. Whilst giving more games to Murph, Powell and others.

At Widnes Shaun Wane got it wrong. Right at the end of his radio interview he's heard saying "I won't make that mistake again". He knows it more than anyone.

Against Bradford he didn't get it wrong.
The ref Tim Roby awarded the Bulls a try from the most blatent knock on any of us have seen which Gale converted. That gave them a half time lead.
Roby then sent off Micky Mac for a single punch. Same punch as Paul Wood at Wembley on Ablett, though Wood remained on the field.

Both McIlorum and Wood were charged with grade a offences which proves MM should not have been sent off. When MM departed we were in front and in control of the game. Those mistakes by Tim Roby cost Wigan the game. Shaun Wane did not.

I agree, Father.

He did claim that the players that missed out against Widnes were carrying injuries which is why he rested them. That could have been an attempt to save himself from the criticism coming his way but in subsequent weeks O'Loughlin, Farrell, Leuluai and Richards ended up missing games through injury. So potentially the players who missed out were carrying knocks and they could have been the victims of whatever has caused so many players to pick up knocks throughout the year and particularly towards the end of the year; some might suggest it was pushing players too hard in training.

People are happy to lose games. Happy to finish lower down the league. There are serious problems within out sport but no more so than having a 27 week competition where the games don't matter. People talk about P&R, internationals, adminstartion etc but i cannot believe the RFL cannot see people are stopping going to the regular seaosn games because they are meaningless. This, IMO is a major problem.

Wane rests players and gets beat. Folk complain. Wane doesn't rest players and finishes top then misses out on final by a point. Folk complain that we didn't 'build to the business end of the season'... or rather 'lose more games'. Don't get it. When I go to a game I want to be entertained and preferably win. I just don't get how it is possible to send a team out to be mediocre for part of the season on purpose. I don't think Leeds have done it by design, just by being poor most of the time. Simple as that. Then having good experienced players to save them when it counts. Really don't think it was coached that way but what do I know? Would be such a shame if we specifically aimed to under-perform for certain parts of the year. Or am I misunderstanding how to 'build a season'? Ok wire rotated and it worked this year. That's one year. I don't see NRL teams being poor all year then playing well at playoff time. Surely the aim is to be the best all the time, INCLUDING playoffs?

And as for rotating players, well I think we have. Not necessarily on purpose but as a result of loss of form or injury. Would be interesting to know how many players played first team for Wigan and wire this year. Suppose it's better to manage it than have it forced upon you but that isn't always possible and is a very tricky thing to get right unless you get lucky with injuries. As mentioned by other posters, the issue of intense training may have an impact but we just don't know for sure. I for one am willing to crack on and give this philosophy a chance... not that my opinion matters! One year doesn't prove anything. Don't want to get back into those years of chopping and changing and knee-jurk reactions. Choose a path and stick with it for at least 3 years, unless it really is a disaster which this isn't!

I think it is evident that certain posters have had it in for Wane since day 1 and some didnt even want him to be appointed in the first place. He is damned if he does and damned if he doesnt with these posters and they will not be happy until he loses his job.

Against Widnes we were winning comfortably twice and should have easily won the game. The players let Wane down, as well as themselves, and conceeded 37 points. Also there is a fair degree of exageration as to how many players were rested with some in fact injured.

Against Bradford we didnt even rest that many players and again was winning until McIlorum was foolishly sent off. Again how was this Wane's fault? If McIlorum hadnt have reacted foolishly then we would have won.

If Wane rests players he is criticised, if he doesnt he is criticised. The posters that are calling for people to be rested will be the first ones to complain when we lose games as a result. Posters that are complaining we didnt rest enough players this season were blaming Wane after the first game for not playing enough friendly games and thus making the players play even more. Then you have posters complaining that he rested players too early and not late enough in the season. This is despite it being fairly obvious what the benefits of any rest will be, even early in the season, and ignoring that this is exactly what Smith did and what Football managers do on a regular basis from the start of a season. When we play poorly it is all Wanes fault, never the players, and when we play well it is down to Iestyn Harris as attack coach. When we look fit it is down to Bitcom, when we look unfit it is because of Wane and his training methods. Some seem to have formed an opinion of Wane at the start of the season, for whatever reasons that may be, and have then proceeded to spend the entire season looking for reasons to justify this opinion.

That is the problem with SL atm finishing top 5 is now good enough to win the GF. But we are not the only sport to be like this many do it now where finishing top does not guarantee your the champions. Rightly or wrongly this is the system we have and it needs a change but the play offs brings in a lot of money into the the game. Attendances are poor but that will be made up by Sky money so no one will push for a change from most of the SL clubs.

But this is the issue as long as attendances on a week to week basis go up and tv ratings are up. How can we perceive SL as a failure and that is the argument that will stand up against any change in the present format. Sky wants it Sky gets it. And i do not see any other network willing to pump in the money sky does.

It wasn't coached that way. McDermott was clearly appalled and furious at some of our play this year. In fact much of the criticism of McDermott has related to him not resting or dropping senior players sufficiently often. If fifth was the aim, why on earth would he risk injury or burn out by playing them?

In some respects I feel sorry for Wane. By being successful in the regular season he lifted expectations only to cop the vitriol when things, unluckily in my book, went a bit tits up. Contrast this with McDermott's first season in which our league form was so crap that nobody was left with any expectations whatsoever only for things to fall into place at the season's end. Of course it could be argued that both are crap coaches but at the end of the day the only other coach who might not envy both their successes is Tony Smith.

We used 32, don't know about Wire.

Making four unforced changes for a game is wrong in itself whether the ref cost us the game or not.

I could equally say with a more experienced side we would have still beaten Bradford with 12 men but that is not the point.

There is a right way to rotate players and a wrong way and Wane got it wrong twice regardless of the results (though those results proved significant meaning he could not rest players later in order to win the league). I do not believe for one minute as was suggested we had six injuries that required all those changes v Widnes for example. And what is the point of playing a young player once like Murphy and then chucking him in the deep end in semi-final?

If there are some young players knocking on the door as Murphy is you need to give them more games and there was plenty of opportunity for that where making one change to allow this would not have taken the shape right out of the side.

We went from one extreme where Madge played his 1st 17 every week to the other where when Wane did make changes he made 6 then 4 changes.

I have absolutely no doubt Wane thought even with these the side would still win but most everyone else didn't without the benefit of hindsight. Ditto it being a good idea to play Murphy in the semi final after giving him one SL game all season.

Agree with DaveO about rotating and there being a right way and a wrong way. As for Bradford I have always thought that the defeat was down to Roby. Once we went down to 12 Bradford changed the way they played anyway.

Wane made mistakes enough at Widnes by resting players but that was compounded by losing players through injury during the game. Mossop went off after 30 mins didn't come back and missed the next two or three matches.
Goulding got concussed by hitting heads with (Hansen I think). Goulding was taken off not to return. Hock then came out of the pack to play right centre.

The trouble always is if you rest so many that there is a risk of losing more experience from the field with inuries as we did at Widnes.

I didnt want him to get the job as I thought it was at least a year too early for him and I stand by that. Our attack first half of the season was great and he of course should get credit for that, and to be honest in most games the defense was pretty solid too.

However in reality he has won a one horse race as we can all agree that only he has taken the league seriously, and infact has lost every big game of the season.