Richards scored a try that another winger might not have done, so with Pat at fullback we may have lost with more points. Just get off Murphy's back. He was not the reason we lost.

I think the issue of positioning or pace is a moot one to be honest. An experienced player would have no doubt read the situation enough to leave a ball that was flying through the air with the chase some distance behind it to bounce out. Ultimately, it's the coaches call to put the player in that position, Murphy was only playing the game as he reads it and cannot be faulted in his approach to last nights game. It's just one of those things. Ultimately to me it hits home particularly hard how I've felt about the regular SL season for a few years now, 27 weeks of largely pointless games jockeying for a very slight advantage in a 3 week knockout competition.

Yep - couldn't agree more. 27 weekly rounds are pointless and a waste of money.

No they would be 100% correct.

Murphy wasn't being pressurised by anyone when he dropped the crucial kick so the idea it was the teams fault for not pressurising Sinfield does not wash.

Pat is one of the best takers of a high ball in the game and he would IMO have first of all not had Sinfield booting the ball at him all night whereas Muprhy effectively had a sign round his neck "kick at me I am a rookie" and he would have taken that kick easily. We'd be talking about about what a lame idea it was of Sinfield to try it had Pat been there not bigging him up as the purveyor of impossible to take kicks.

Also the idea Sinfield would have kicked at someone else if Pat has been at FB and that would also be a problem, no it wouldn't. It would have been far more preferable and is in no way as dangerous.

Why on earth people can't simply acknowledge Wane was an idiot to pick a rookie in a semi final at FB I don't know. It is something a coach should never do. Ever. As was proved on Friday night.

Why? The fact is we’ll never know, and that’s the point you can’t just say what others say is “farcical” when either way we’ll never know.

Charnley is the man for the FB job. Incredibly safe under the bomb, as proven against Leeds even with Hall attacking the same flank.
Pat plays FB like an old fashioned FB, not linking into the line ala Sam, Slater, Hodgson. Pat doesn't play second receiver role. Charnley, when covering for an injured Sam v Cats played as a second receiver.
Charnley has the pace, and quick step to cause all kinds of trouble in broken play, similar to Sam.
Josh is a dangerous player love to seem him with his hands on the ball more. FB provides that.


As we lack ideas and pace in the halves I certainly would to be looking to see Sam return to 6.

Can't believe I'm about to say this but I agree with DaveO



Full backs dropping balls is forgivable, what isn't is sheer stupidity of trying to make an impossible diving catch when there was no opposition players around. Hopefully harsh lesson learned and if he does play for Wigan again he won't make the same mistake.

Charnley at fullback would be similar to zak hardaker, good running in a straight line. He cant run the lines necessary just yet nor can he pass well enough, just like hardaker. Would be a solid fullback, but would need to develop his game.

He's a big enough lad, great pace and he's only 21 don't forget, plenty of time to learn and develop the position. If he's given a few games at FB next season i'd be delighted, Josh is a class act

I posted something similar when we discovered that Sam was crocked.

He appears to have all the attributes needed, but i would like to see him play a game or two before making final judgment.

Then again, we Wigan fans seem to be obsessed with changing players positions



The biggest benefit would be to allow him more opportunities to get the ball in his hand.

I blame Gelling.



Seriously though, while he makes mistakes we could have done with one of his 150 metres gained stints to help out our beaten pack...

It's an interesting idea and we definitely need to get Sam playing at stand-off next year.

Says who exactly? How do you possibly know he would be like Zak Hardaker?

the example you used was that of him playing at fullback against catalans and what i saw of him there indicated he would be similar to zak hardaker. but i guess to put it in perspective, this is the zak hardaker who has just won young player of the year after playing half the season in an unfamiliar position. but zak hardaker isnt fluid in the role yet, nor would i expect charnley to be without a decent preseason of preparation. i cant imagine a sam tomkins style move where he became a sudden revelation. but then again i guess sam already had more to his game at that point. and this isnt a dig at charnley or your point, i just think charnley at fullback wouldnt offer quite as much as say sam or brett hodgson. but as has been mentioned, he is only 21.

i think i argued with myself a bit there

No I understand your point. I think given a pre season and several games as a FB Charnley would impress, I cold be wrong, but he seems to have all the attributes already to make an excellent FB.

Whilst i can't be bothered arguing with any of the vitriol that usually arises when the "Sam to you know where" chatter happens. It would be interesting to see it in action.

As phenomenal a threat as he is from FB and as good as his defence has been. He is poor under the bomb, i don't think anyone can argue with that.

Josh is very good under the kick and his elusive running would be a boon with open space, i do have doubts (well not doubts, more queries) about his bravery when sticking his head in dangerous positions and his one on one defence. Yes he can tackle and his technique is sound, but can he "defend" if you know what i mean?

Right then

Who is taking the credit for the "Josh to FB campaign"?

Me or thee?

Haha! Joint venture? Part of my wanting to see Josh at FB is to see Sam move to 6, offer that extra spark in the halves which I feel we're so badly missing.

Sam to 6?

Are you mad

With Josh at FB where would you play Sam?

Why would you move one of the league's best wingers to FB?

To give an excellent player more ball time, more space to show his skills. To allow our best attacking player (Sam) into the halves to offer more in attack.

More to that, why would you limit someone with Josh's abilities to just the wing?

It was a joke buddy

See my earlier post and i agree about the change. I was giving some faux outrage.

Slightly worried for a moment!