I like him and I think hes got alot of room for improvement.

Noble is Mr Safe and this type of coach would usually go for Pat at the back who is as safe as you can get. I think the fact he is playing Phelps ahead of Pat at the back speaks volumes about Phelp's potential.

Hes brave, he shows heart and to be fair hes got a bit of pace and class about him. IMO hes earned himself a contract to stay here till the end of next season.

You get rid of players who are underperforming or detioriating with you do not get rid of young players doing a good job improving game by game and put in 100% regardless of whether they come from Ince or Sydney.

...or does he not trust Ainscough?

I never fully understood the logic behind that. It's not as though he was ever likely to be in a game situation where a trampoline was readily available for him to leap above his opponents.

then you could play Phelps on the wing...this isnt about Ainscough.

It's about Phelps, Famous Amos, Richards and Ainscough.

4 into 3 doesn't go!

Nobby has gone safety first picking Phelps IMO

Exactly.

Dave

Honestly



What does Phelps have to do with Shaun bloody Ainscough.

Phelps is our fullback, the best fullback at the club.

Ainscough is a winger, he is battling with Roberts/Richards for selection.

Everyone having a pop would be deadly quiet if Phelps was a Wiganer and Ainscough an import.



Bang On

Frightening

You were due to make a good point sometime fella

Its about improving your muscles in jumping. Jumping on a trampoline as harder then on grass and will improve your muscles. It's like running on the beach is harder then on grass. So by spending hours jumping on a trampoline and getting stronger that way will make it easier when you need to challenge for a high ball.

I think a lot of Basketball players do it, also some tie weights to their ankles to strength their jump.

I also agree with this. For me there are two other overseas players going before him at the end of the season and these are Tim Smith and Phil Bailey. I have nothing against Bailey really but we simply do not need him with the amount of second rowers we have at the club now.

Looking at players in isolation as you and Neil are doing rather than looking at the make up of the entire team before deciding whether an out of contract player gets a new deal is a great way to end up with a poor team.

As previously pointed out it isn't just to do with Ainscough but the make up of the back line.

Roberts and Richards are going nowhere and presumably club wants Ainscough to stay as well. The club must also have an eye on the quota and making money available for the signings it supposedly wants to make.

Put all that together and that should mean Phelps doesn't get a new deal.

If he was a great player it would be different but he isn't and being the best full back at Wigan ought not an automatic reason to get a new deal unless being the best full back we have also equals being a very good full back.



How do you conclude that? Plenty of Wigan born players incur the wrath of the message board from time to time.

With regard to Phelps he isn't particularly good anyway and keeping him on reduces the recruitments options of the club when we have players contracted who could do the job.

I can't understand why anyone would bat an eye if he was let go. Retaining him because he is enthusiastic is not a good reason to keep him on and he needs to be worth it as a player and IMO he isn't.

Dave

Skiiers do it as well, and they tend to out-jump and sometimes outsprint those from other sports. Trampolining would be a great idea.

He is particulary good though Dave. He has made the fullback spot his own. He did not just walk into it either he beat decent candidates for the role in both Roberts and Richards. We look a better team with him at fullback and we are alot more dangerous in attack.

As Grego said, Smith is on his way regardless and Bailey 100% has to leave as we have three good enough players in Mossop, Farrell and Flannagan more than capable of stepping up. I do not see why would have to lose a good player on a small wage who has demonstrated very clearly he wants to play and give his all for Wigan RL.

We do, but not according to those who love Shaun Ainscough because it is easy to blame Phelps for him not being selected - irrespective of Phelps being as you say the #1 fullback at the club.



I tell you why - his name isn't Shaun Ainscough and it's his fault Ainscough has faults to his game.

Agreed...I was trying to not get drawn into the Ainscough debate as its utterly pointless.

If only all the players had the commitment and passion Phelps has ..

If it was a straight decision between Roberts and Phelps it's Phelps for me.

Phelps is average at best, i'm not saying Roberts is the ideal solution but he is here on a 4 year deal. If we are really wanting to make move forwards we must remove the deadwood and average players from the squad, so for me its bye bye Phelps. Great effort but simply not good enough, if we hope to be a top 3 club competing for silverware.

I do agree, but I think he should be offered another one year deal, to see what sort of player he can develop into. Still quite young.

This is what I am trying to say. Ideally I'd get rid of Roberts but we can't.

Phelps may have made the full back spot his own but that isn't saying much at Wigan currently.

There is also the fact the none federation trained limit drops from 8 to 6 next year. I read on Mike's forum that means with IL saying he is after recruiting two players both Carmont and Phelps will have to leave to accommodate the new signings assuming Bailey and Smith going get us down to 6. These are the only none federation trained players out of contract so if we want to recruit two players all four have to go to keep us within the limit.

So it's a case of do we want to keep Phelps and not bring in a prop or half back from overseas (and that is what IL said he was doing)?

If we keep Phelps then this means looking to recruit from within the GB federation (how likely is that?) or sticking with what we have e.g. TL and Sam being the half backs or giving Coley a new deal.

So if we keep Phelps it compromises recruitment elsewhere so as I said you need to look beyond individual players and look at how you are to strengthen the team. Keeping Phelps reduces the flexibility to do that a great deal.

Dave

Said this months ago when ainny first came through......1h a day with rads he'd be a different player....Shows you what a muppet Noble is when hes got one of the worlds greatest full backs in his coaching team who could give anyone a masterclass on making the ball yours, and he fails to utilise him properly and players have to GO to rads rather than nobby saying Amos / Ainscough etc. get learning off radlinkski

I second that!!!
I'd send Roberts back to Oz on the first plane available as he has done nothing so far this season, and i'd replace him with Ainscough. Ainscough and Phelps have shown more enthusiasm and excitement at playing for the team than Roberts. Noble drops Ainscough for making a few mistakes, but Roberts has made just as many if not more but he doesnt get dropped and hes meant to be a more experienced player!! what a joke!! Keep Phelps and send Amos back!

Take it you've not read Rad's book then...

LOL!