So you want him as a first reciever ball distributer? cos that's how we play our halves.

The reason we can't move Sam to 6 is Jack Murphy. He looked a good prospect, was thrown in the play off against Leeds, overall had a decent game but made one crucial mistake. Where is he now? All Confidence and self belief he had is probably gone.

Play offs are not the time to out in kids who have had a handful of games. I don't want Hampshire or Tierney to go the way of Murphy. If Sam goes to 6 one of those will play FB. An out of sorts Green IMO is a better option than a kid. Their time will come.

I would put Richards to fullback, some will say that he wouldn't offer anything in attack, Sam is offering nothing in attack at present the way we are playing. As well a certain "Scotsman" at Hudds is certain to try and bomb Sam out of the game and at times lately he has looked a bit dodgy at judging them.

Play Burgess on the wing with Sam at halfback, we have got to try and vary the play to try and get out of the massive rut we are in at present.

By 'times lately' do you mean since moving to fullback?

What I meant is that Sam has bottled out of even going for the bomb at times and has waited for it to bounce.
With Richards at fullback to deal with the Danny Brough bombs I would feel safer.

He's always looked like a rabbit in the headlights under the high ball imo and I've regularly wondered why Paddy doesn't attack at 5 and defend at 1.

What? The reason we can't play Sam at 6 is because of Murphy? This is bizarre. It's because as a 6/7 he won't have the space to run in the back field and open play. It's the ball playing halves and dummy runners which open up gaps for the likes fo Sam.

ITS THE F^&KING STUCTURE THATS AT FAULT NOT THE PLAYERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Couldn't agree more. However, Wane probably isn't going to completely revamp our attacking game for the play offs by completely changing the way we play. This to me seems like the only realistic way to change up our attack, which quite frankly is not good enough. It is the structures, but sadly it seems Wane won't change them!



The situation with Hampshire is different to Murphy. Murphy played one game then was thrown in for a must-win game. Huddersfield is not a win at all costs game, if we lose; so what? We get another chance. Besides, Hampshire has played much more than Murphy did and certainly seems up to the task.



Yes. At least then he can get involved in the game. It's so frustrating to seem him stalking out wide knowing there isn't really anything he can do out there. I'd much sooner see him up the middle where he can actually influence the game.

You're expecting players to think during a game ? Blimey



In all seriousness, that's exactly what a good backline should be doing ..... and why I've always thought ST is a bad fullback ... Excellent offensive back but he's too attack minded for the periods of the game where it's simply, like it or not, 'roll yer sleeves up' time ..... and it's up to Richards to tell him that and make him swap positions.

No, try reading. The reason either Tierney or Hampshire shouldn't be thrown into the cauldron of play off rugby is it could destroy their confidence as it did to Murphy. There is a time and a place to play kids and the play off is not it. If the coaching staff believed either were ready we wouldn't be looking to sign firstly Minichello then Bowen.

Charnley at FB anyone? That would make defences think, and you would think that Charnley is more likely to bust out of a attempted tackle more than Sam ala Greg Inglis.

m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/arti ... d=11121364 Quote Sam Tomkins has signed with the Warriors and will be unveiled by the club in the next 10 days. The Super League star told British media last week that he had made "no plans" for the next two years and also claimed he had the 2015 Rugby World Cup on his radar. There were also reports after the Challenge Cup final claiming he may stay with Wigan. But the Herald on Sunday understands the Warriors' deal with Tomkins was completed last week. He will be one of the highest, if not the highest paid player in the club's history, with an annual salary believed to be more than $750,000. The 24-year-old fullback, who starred in Wigan's Challenge Cup triumph over Hull last week, won't be seen in New Zealand until at least mid-December. At the end of the Super League season, Tomkins will join the England team at their pre-World Cup training camp in South Africa. Tomkins, who has scored 145 tries in 149 games for Wigan since making his debut in 2008 as a 19-year-old, has yet to visit Auckland during his dealings with the Warriors, but his mother has been in town to survey property options.'" I just want this over and done with now. It's dragged on longer than a story-line in Eastenders.

m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/arti ... d=11121364 Quote Sam Tomkins has signed with the Warriors and will be unveiled by the club in the next 10 days. The Super League star told British media last week that he had made "no plans" for the next two years and also claimed he had the 2015 Rugby World Cup on his radar. There were also reports after the Challenge Cup final claiming he may stay with Wigan. But the Herald on Sunday understands the Warriors' deal with Tomkins was completed last week. He will be one of the highest, if not the highest paid player in the club's history, with an annual salary believed to be more than $750,000. The 24-year-old fullback, who starred in Wigan's Challenge Cup triumph over Hull last week, won't be seen in New Zealand until at least mid-December. At the end of the Super League season, Tomkins will join the England team at their pre-World Cup training camp in South Africa. Tomkins, who has scored 145 tries in 149 games for Wigan since making his debut in 2008 as a 19-year-old, has yet to visit Auckland during his dealings with the Warriors, but his mother has been in town to survey property options.'" I just want this over and done with now. It's dragged on longer than a story-line in Eastenders.

Wigans announcement will be a week on Wednesday, prior to wigans last home game of the season

He needs to go out with a bang. His form over recent games has done nothing to justify the ability he has.

Never thought I would say this but I will be glad to see the end of this, it has been made bigger than it is and the club have handled the situation terribly.

The club have handled it according to their policy. They never comment on rumours or speculation. If the article in the NZ press is correct and a deal was only finalised last week then there was nothing to announce.

And in reality, if true it only has any effect next season, so why do we need to know now.

Because some must know everything from what they have for breakfast to how long their tackle is. Some can't accept or understand the reality that players (like everyone else) will look after number 1 and are entitled to privacy.

Because 2 years ago Sam signed a 5 year "contract" with the intent that nobody could even speak to him about a new contract until 3 years are up, what has suddenly changed regarding this? The fact that the club have allowed Sam to even speak to any other clubs about contracts is embarrassing, and opens the door for any team in the NRL to approach our players no matter what is signed.

I have no doubt that IL will announce Sam Tomkins departure along with some "good news" for the club, just like he announced Sams "5 year" contract when Joel departed.

If anyone thinks the club has handled this well they are kidding themselves.

Sums it up perfectly IMO........

The fact is that every player has his price regardless of contract. It may not be ideal but it's true.

We still don't know if Sams going.
If he is then good luck to him, he will have a short career in RL and needs earn as much as he can while he can.
I will consider my self lucky to have been around to watch a great talent every week and maybe we will get some other attacking moves when he goes.
If he is with us then we get to watch a great talent for another year.
There will be life after Sam

And the fact is that the "price" doesn't matter to supporters.

The chairman may well get some money in his pocket. He may well try to pretend that this is going on "long term development" or "investing in the infrastructure" of the club. However, this should be happening irrespective of transfer fees. Surely a business plan cannot rely on transfer fees (or at least should not for a club the size of Wigan).

As I have said before, Tomorrow never comes, or to use another cliche, we have been without jam for long enough to make jam today more important than jam tommorrow.

And where else does this money come from?
Or do you expect IL to fund it all out of his own pocket.