The scenario could just as well read..... We prevent Sam from leaving and he knuckles down like the pro he is and gets on with it. The Rabbitohs see this and realise there is no point in trying to entice Josh away from the club and they therefore direct their efforts elsewhere. Plus we let the world know that this club will stand by its principles and won't roll over for anybody. IMO retaining that self respect is getting to be more of a priority. Any other stance merely let the drain continue. IMO of course.

You mean the largely intangible and immeasurable areas that can be used to justify anything?

Ok.

Yeah I mean it's not like our youth development reaps very obvious rewards..... How did we come by Sam again?

Bl00dy rubbish Wigan

You mistake the point.

Obviously youth development is a good idea.

However, it's very easy to use it as a "catch all".

Players of the calibre of Sam Tomkins come along once every generation. Not every year.

To lose them/him, seemingly without a fight, is disgraceful IMHO.

What about Charnley, Goulding, Mossop, Crosby, McIlorum, Hansen, Farrell, O'Loughlin, Tuson and Hampshire, did they all come out of thin air as well? That's just players we produced who I'd have at Wembley, never mind all the reserves. I can't understand how any Wigan fan can claim money spent on youth development yields no tangible results.

Losing Sam without a fight is a different point. Having said that, did we not increase his contract numerous times and even lobby the RFL to change the rules so he can earn money outside of the game. I'd say we've been fighting to keep him ever since 2009

I don't think I do mistake the point. You're saying extra money to the club is no good to the fans, I'd say there's a hell of a lot of untapped potential we could make use of, given the resources, and that the progress we've made so far supports my point. Ploughing money into development could yield 2 Tomkins'. Which obviously benefits the fans. I don't think you disagree that it's a good idea, I just think you're not giving it the credence it deserves.

The bit I've underlined is the problem.

Sam is a unique talent in this day and age, so yes, to lose him without a fight would be a disgrace. But until we know for sure that's what's happened, I feel we should keep our powder reasonably dry.

Given he's best player in Britain by a country mile, and that Britain is way down the pecking-order in world RL, you can surely see that it would be extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible, for us to hang onto players in that category indefinitely - far more so than it ever was in the past.

In the light of that, it's highly, highly possible that Wigan have fought hard to keep Sam and have simply, inevitably failed. I recommend you don't cut ties with the club until you know for certain that this hasn't happened.

"Ploughing money into development" and spending money to attract top quality players are not mutually exclusive you know.

Given Wigan RL is the most famous brand in RL in the UK and arguably the world, is it too much to expect?

But as I explained, it's not just about development. There's scouting, video analysis, player education, specialist coaching, medical recovery equipment etc. all things that can help to give us that winning edge.

There's far more to running a club than players.

Does your first line always have to be patronising? DaveO does the same thing. Rogues hits the nail on the head above, plus, surely you would agree that our brand could be a lot stronger, even though it's the strongest in a relatively low profile sport

Your equation of these with Sam shows your skills in identifying 'great' players.

Some are at best, average players.

I know you have said in the past, your relatively quite new to the game, and without the experience of decades of observation like a few others on this forum.

Few of your list above will be remembered by fans 10 years hence.

Hampshire is one who does indeed possibly have the x factor. But we don't know yet.

But next year, will our beloved Chairman Mr Lenegan be selling that lad as well ?

It's money in the bank [i'dontcha know'[/i!

I am sorry your argument 'holds no water'.

Players like Sam Tomkins come along once in a generation.

And we seem to have sold out ! For money in the bank.

I do however happily concede that you agree that we should try to keep Sam.

I'm not sure that Mr Lenegan agrees though.

How do you know that no fight is being put up.. You have no idea what happening, just as i don't..!!

www.3news.co.nz/Reports-Warriors ... fault.aspx Tomkins is being touted as the next Billy Slater and will head to the Warriors with a rumoured transfer fee over $900,000.

www.3news.co.nz/Reports-Warriors ... fault.aspx Tomkins is being touted as the next Billy Slater and will head to the Warriors with a rumoured transfer fee over $900,000.

This is a very valid point that some who have said that the club has not done its bit to hold onto him should really think about. You can only flog a dead horse so much before you realise its best just to sell it to the knackers yard!

12 years is hardly new to the game, I've spent nearly all of that either playing or refereeing as well. Anyway, I wasn't claiming they are great players, I was trying to demonstrate how reliant we are on our own production system. Basic economics theory tells us that it's going to be very tough to make any good signings while the NRL is so dominant and all the top SL players are so heavily concentrated at the big 5 clubs anyway. So which team will do best? The one that doesn't have to rely on signing top players out of nowhere, and has means of replacing the ones it loses.

With regard to Sam, are you saying you think IL is the one driving the move, not Sam? I'd be very suprised if that's the case.

Some people seem to have completely made their mind up about this, which I find utterly baffling.

It presupposes that no NRL clubs have been making any effort to acquire Sam - which we know is not the case.

It presupposes that Sam has no interest at all in going to Aus - which is at best guesswork, but seems incredibly unlikely.

It also presupposes that IL wants Sam out ASAP, which has got to be nonsense if for no other reason than he promised we'd keep the guy for three years minimum and surely doesn't want to be made to look a fool.

I do agree though that it's time we made a stand on contracts - maybe it's too late in Sam's case, but even if it means that certain players get frozen out of the game for a couple of years, I feel we have to start getting tough. If the RFL is not prepared to defend it's home-grown players, we have to do it ourselves. We can't be the only provider of new talent for the NRL and English RU, and must take action that will dissuade their scouts from always knocking on our door, and send them to other RL clubs' doors.

It's an interesting point, could see us keep our best players, but equally it could stop any player who has ambitions of joining the NRL from joining us. Could also see us having to offer shorter contracts, which could mean more regular wage increases. I don't really see it working to be honest unless all of the big 5 take the same stance. I hope we are selling the NRL angle to youngsters who are deciding whether to play football or rugby. Playing in Melbourne or Sydney knocks the spot off playing in Mnchester or London

There is an interesting comment in todays Manchester Evening News regarding Salford's attempt to sign NZ Warriors fullback Kevin Locke, in the article Locke is quoted as saying that he has no interest in signing for Salford or any other SL club.
He goes on to say that he would rather move from fullback to standoff and play alongside Sam for the NZ Warriors.

I'd call it depressing rather than interesting.

Even if it's utter nonsense (never - the MEN!!!), it still underlines how little clout we have in the world of sport in the modern age. Our best players are all going, no-one's coming - no-one wants to come (even questionable characters like Locke), and it's all delivered in a tone of scornful dismissal.

Back in the early 1990s, British RL was a towering force. It's difficult to quantify how much ground we seem to have lost since then.

I think that is the problem - at that time things were all rosy and the powers that be became complacent - a combination of the game standing still and economics (recession etc) have left RL over here lagging years behind. Playing catch-up is not even close to being enough at the moment.

What is also a worry (and something which seems to have passed a lot by) is the imports that have come from the NRL in the last year or two - many have used the homesickness/family argument to get released from their contracts sooner - meaning that even the ones that do come to SL cannot be relied upon to stay - leaving clubs planning in tatters.

And as I explained we should be getting all this IN ADDITION to top class players. It's not, or at least should not, be a trade off.

It's not good enough to simply say "The money from Sam will be used to invest in the infrastructure" etc etc etc

Throwaway comments, meaningless application.

Rogues does not. See my post above.

Patronising? Tell me where I am wrong.

Tomkins plays v Catalan.