We're also missing an marquee player or two who can put bums on seats. A Barrett, Robinson, Tomkins or anyone else who can lift the crowd. I'm more concerned with the level of mediocrity in SL in general. It's quite worrying when you consider what's going on in the NRL every weekend...

Having sad that, i'm not overly happy with the slow starts and discipline issues which seem to have crept into Wigan's play...

In that case it may be time for a plan B in marketing (even though Wigan do not seem to have one on the field),
They should work out what they think a season ticket should cost and then manipulate the charges as follows.
First two thirds of the season charge 30% less that the seasonal figure arrived at and for the last third of the season (when everyone says is the only time that matters) charge 30% over the average.
This post as been done with tongue firmly in cheek, the only problem is some fans may think it is the way forward.

Whilst I can understand what you are saying the problem is that those marquee players when they were here were taking up over 30% of the salary cap.

Sure, completely understand that, which is why IMO the salary cap has to go up (i'd give London an even higher cap) to make Super League more competitive. Otherwise, all our best talent will continue to leave...

It's the same argument that has gone round and round pretty much since the SL salary cap was introduced. The cap needs to go up to prevent the top stars from leaving to other codes/leagues that can afford to pay higher wages, but not enough (if any) SL teams could afford to pay those wages even if the cap allowed it, and some of the ones that probably could afford a higher cap have said they don't want it to increase anyway.

The SC hasn't really acheived one criteria it was supposed to by spreading the top talent throughout the division, many of the best players from the "lower" teams still end up moving to the "bigger" clubs. But until every club is able to comfortably spend the full SC each year, and still function as a business, is there any viable alternative?

The dilemma really is do we raise the cap to a level that only 3 or 4 teams would be able to afford, leading to a bigger gulf in standards between the top SL teams and the bottom ones, but by doing so allowing those 3 or 4 teams to be able to match offers coming in from Union or the NRL?

You cant favour any team with a higher cap, that would make a complete mockery of promotion and relegation.
But raise the cap all round, to something like infinity for those who can afford it

I'm sure London already have a higher cap related to the vastly higher cost of living down there.

I was just looking at Bowens stats from Friday. www.superleague.co.uk/report/9961 Top metre maker. Lockers and Pettybourne were good, Dudson dreadful. Back to Bowen he's already in the top 10 for tackle busts and clean breaks despite playing less games. Not bad for a crock with dodgy knees. www.superleague.co.uk/stats/player_stats

I was just looking at Bowens stats from Friday. www.superleague.co.uk/report/9961 Top metre maker. Lockers and Pettybourne were good, Dudson dreadful. Back to Bowen he's already in the top 10 for tackle busts and clean breaks despite playing less games. Not bad for a crock with dodgy knees. www.superleague.co.uk/stats/player_stats

How Dudson still gets a spot in the team is beyond me. He surely must have something incriminating on Wane.

Dudson has never kicked on from when we first signed him. He got himself fit so fair play to him but he's never used that as a positive. He doesn't run his weight, his defence is suspect and his discipline is poor. I've been waiting for him to have that moment where the penny drops like it did with somebody like Sam Moa at Hull but it doesn't look like happening.

It's a shame because physically he's got everything he needs.

That would be true if Wane was playing a computer game caled "SL Championship manager" or something where the only person he had to please was himself.

Meanwhile back in the real world sport is supposed to be about entertainment and the fans want entertaining.

The majority of fans don't sit there thinking yet another naff disjointed league performance doesn't matter.

If it[i really[/i doesn't matter the fans will simply stop going and eventually we really won't have a team worth watching.

I completely agree. Never mind 2010, we have gone from double winners to a rebuilding process in an off season. That is just poor. Fans can see this and are frustrated when it manifests itself by poor performances against the liles of London with not that many changes to the team.



Many predicted problems at Warrington as they hung onto players too long. Our problems are because we don't hold onto players long enough and/or manage the departure of key players well enough.

If we get too many "trial" games where the coach is putting in too many back-up players fans especially season ticket holders will begin to think why bother paying for a season ticket. They will get a membership card and pick and choose the games they want to go and see based on the 19 named 48 hours before the game.

I have been a ST holder for 30+ years now and this season is the first time I that I will consciously pick which away games to not bother attending based upon the team put on the park. Whether I carry this forward to next season will depend on the performances this year and the clubs policy on retaining and replacing top players...

I don't want to watch the club turn into a feeder for the NRL......

I agree 100% with your last 2 posts Dave. The turnover of players has to stop, all the excitement of being Champions is being eroded. When we were rubbish it didn't matter that players came and went because well, we were rubbish anyway!

In 2010 we got one new player and a new coach, we won the title with a settled squad.

2011-2013 - ok we had some comings and goings but we still managed to hold together a strong core of a squad. The incomings were exciting young players that were phased in; Tomkins, Farrell, Charnley. At the same time our longer-standing players were hitting their peak; O'Loughlin, Hansen, Richards. Even the likes of Tuson and Mossop, not world beaters but they should have been held on to. What do other clubs do that Wigan can't?

This season has been the tipping point for me. There was a time when you could easily reel off Wigan's best 13/17 without even thinking about it. Now, who knows?!

I agree with your argument to an extent, but a lot of our double winning season was made up of poor and lacklustre performances. We lost 7 out of our last 9 regular SL games, but ultimately it didn't really matter as we picked up both major trophies. I think this has resulted in a lot of fans become disillusioned with the weekly rounds, which is why we have seen a drop in our average attendance and number of ST holders.

It is the current league system that is flawed and is allowing teams to peak at the right time of the season. In 2011, we were the current champions and added Finch, Hoffman and Lima to a largely unchanged squad and ended up completely dropping off at the business end of the season, so it is not just a recruitment issue that is causing our poor performances atm, and we don't really know what effect the WCC has had.

I'm not saying for one minute that I expect it to all come good and we'll end up doing the double again, but there needs to be some perspective in how we're currently playing and look at is as a season as a whole. Playing as badly as we have, we've still won 6 of our last 7, and that includes being 6 seconds from victory at Cas.

The league structure is a problem but it will only be so if the clubs treat it in a way that disrespects the league. As I said in my previous post:

[iThat would be true if Wane was playing a computer game called "SL Championship manager" or something where the only person he had to please was himself.

Meanwhile back in the real world sport is supposed to be about entertainment and the fans want entertaining.
[/i



2011 was a successful season as we won the cup so I am not sure of your point here. Dropping off was not good but not many teams have done the double.

Our own player drain started after the cup win with Joel leaving and I think it culminated at the end of last season with just too many of quality having gone since then.

I also think this comment from Orrell lad is very true:

[iThe turnover of players has to stop, [uall the excitement of being Champions is being eroded[/u.[/i



If we win either major trophy fans will to a degree forget the bad games but that doesn't mean they won't view next season selectively in terms of games to watch

I think in the Madge/Wane era some of the best and most entertaining rugby we've played was around this time 2 years ago (beating Sts in cup and Magic, 50 on Leeds at Headingley etc), but ultimately we were beaten by Leeds in both semis and ended up with nowt apart from LLS, it's not a case of disrespecting the league, it's been proven that peaking at the right time and not going hell for leather in the weekly rounds is the correct tactic under this current system. Do you think Leeds fans would swap the recent 5th place finishes for the GFs and CCFs they've been in? The system is the major problem and thankfully it's being changed to one that actually rewards finishing higher in the league.

I completely agree with you and Orrell Lad about the player drain, I wish we were still watching a team that had Sam and Joel, Hansen, Mossop in, and I've been less than impressed with some of our recruitment over the last few seasons, and yes this has resulted in a drop in the average attendance and ST holders. I, personally, now just have a Loyal 18 membership and pick and choose games, this is down to a combination of work commitments and waining interest in the weekly rounds. Hopefully a 12 team league will lead to fewer games of the standard of Friday night and a greater emphasis on playing well week-in, week-out.

wish the new format next year was:-

week one
Qualifying Semi
1 v 2 winner to final
Elimination playoff
3 v 4 loser out

week two
Loser of 1 v 2 at home to winner of 3 v 4 winner to final

week three

The Final

that way coming 1st or 2nd means something, 3rd and 4th have to win 2 on the bounce to make final


week 2

Next year it is a straight knockout 1 v 4 and 2 v 3 so finishing top 2 certainly will mean something.

After we played the Roosters, Radlinski posted a blog saying the loss had led the management to re-evaluate how they needed to approach moulding the Wigan team - to win the SL is one thing, but to take it to the Aussies and win needs a different approach. Now whether that's from a change in attitude, training or personnel I think this year's recruitment drive (not to mention who we get rid of) is going to make for interesting viewing...

I know but the previous post by pie.warrior is something I advocated late last year when all the restructuring debate was going on.

That system would really reward top spot, and to some extent second, and more importantly make it harder to win from third or fourth. Under that system it would be impossible for a 3 v 4 Grand Final.

I think that is too big a reward for 3 & 4. One game away from a GF for finishing 4th? This is just a cup competition and I think a playoff should do as others have suggested and make it harder than that for the lower finished teams to get to the GF.

I don't think this will do anything to improve the fans views of playoffs in general.

There probably are better ways of doing a 4 team playoff but I think the fact there will be more games during the season has been taken in to account so there is only going to be one round of playoff games before the GF. The fact there will only be 4 teams that qualify will mean it is less likely a team can accrue points early then take their foot off the gas because doing that would risk dropping out of the top 4 altogether.

I also question whether a week off for the team going straight through the final (in pie warrior's suggestion) is much of a reward, that part of the season is about building momentum so a week off could end up actually being a disadvantage.

I know the system coming in next year isn't perfect but it's much better than what we currently have. It should result in more games with a higher intensity, more emphasis on winning the league and no reward for mediocrity. The playoffs are nice and simple, no 2nd chances, just a simple 1v4, 2v3 knockout to reach the final.

Since the beginning of SL, 12 out of the 21 times a team has earned a week off during the play offs, they have gone on to win the following week. I'm not sure whether that proves anything either way to be fair.

Yeh I think sometimes it's a big help to have a rest and let the players rest up and clear any niggly injuries, but sometimes it's good to build momentum and keep it going. It needs to be viewed in the context of the season, I don't think you can categorically state a week off = advantage.

For example, in 2010 we went out of the CC at the QFs so had a couple of weeks off already come play off time, then we were pretty poor against Leeds in the first week of the POs and ended up losing by a point. We then backed up with 3 convincing victories and ended up as Champions. I honestly don't believe we'd have won the GF that year if we'd sneaked through against Leeds in week 1, it was like we needed the extra game to put things right.

Then in 2011, we played Saints at home having won the CC and therefore played every week without a break (+ the WCC), we desperately needed a victory in the first week of the POs to get a week off, that didn't happen and we ended up limping out in the semis.