My original Post Or DaveO's Reply????

IL renewed Nobles contract cant have it both ways can you?.....I didnt go off topic I was answering the post before me and replied to his comments. Keep up.

I fail to see what will be done with the wages of other players has to do with an opinion that TL's wages could have been better spent. He was the one out of contract now, not them.

I am sure we will debate what happens to those players and their wages if they leave at the time.

Dave

No reply to the other question then???

That's assuming you feel TL's wages could have been better spent. That's only your opinion. Most of us are more than happy with his re-signing. Therefore why should this be seen as a negative just because you don't agree with it? IL did what he felt best for the club in re-signing a 23 year old, world cup winning player who's dedication to the club cannot be faulted. As I said...most of us agree.

Just skimmed this thread but think i have the crux of it, and basically i agree the club is moving in the right direction, i think the systems IL has placed in the club will serve it well for the future and potential.

For the first time in a long time you can see where thought is being placed onto the next player to step forward when a player leaves the club.

My main issues revelove around BN, and this for me is the only real big poor decision IL has made.

I do not think IL works alone on recruitment there has to be advice and interaction with the coach and i think any coach worth there salt should have fought to get Ainscough a starting shirt for 2009, rather than look to recruit another outside back and not a Prop, but contracts and situations with attracting a good Prop may not have been as simple as 1+1=2.

As i said at the time i think we missed a real trick renewing BN's deal when someone like Brown was on the market, but i am sure as and when BN leaves, the person in my opinion holding the club back the most now, with the right appointment we will quickly become a team capable of challenging for honours due to the infrastructure and policies lead by IL and his actions.

Which one!

Dave

Yes it is. I presume that isn't a problem?



Most people do not see him as 7 and qualify their agreement with his re-signing that he moves to 9. My view is that isn't very likely for the reasons I have given. However that does not mean it should be seen as a negative simply because that is[i my[/i opinion. People can read what I post and make their own minds up as to whether I have a point or not.

Isn't that what this place is about?

Dave

Thank You Jonh!

Despite us disagreeing over the BN issue (And TBH it does look like your right from purely an "On field" perspective although we don't know if Brown or any other coach would/could have done any better??) I think you have looked at the Big Picture!

Again I agree with your statements about recruitment over players and it not being as simple as 1+1 = 2 as you put it but I would add that Maybe, just Maybe that's what IL had to cope with at the point he gave BN an extra 12 months.

The main crux of my post was to draw realistic and reasonable parallels to what happened at the start of our last great Era and the understanding that for 10 years before that and for 3/4/5 years after 1980 we had a Real Dearth of success/talent at the club!

Things arent as bad as some people would like us to believe and every time a wrong decision is made (Which they will) they would love us to believe it's the end of the world!

This one!

Lets get to the Crux of it then!

Do you Believe that as a "Complete Club" (Not just on the field) we are in a better or Worse position looking at the next 5 years considering what the exisiting Chairman has done in his first 12/18 months than we were 3/4 years ago (2005 early 2006) and the prospects then for the following 5 years?

Simple answer required

2005/2006 - ML & DW at the Helm Looking forward at next 4/5 years

or

2009/2010 - IL MH at the helm looking at our prospects for the next 4/5 years

After 1911 posts on here Juke I would have thought you had learned by now i am always right!!!

At the time of your post it was 1912!

So you are wrong, which brings into doubt all your other Opinions!

Apart from those that i agree with of course!

That's the problem I have with your original post. They are not realistic or reasonable parallels IMO.

You have decided what the conclusion is and so construct a series of arguments from where to you start from where you want to get to. It's a bit like Chinese whispers.

The trouble is these arguments are little more than suppositions or questions you subsequently treat as a factual basis to further your advance to the conclusion you want to present.

As good an example as any is in your reply to Jonh when you said:



And maybe, just maybe, it wasn't but it won't stop you concluding it was.

Dave

There is no point speculating what ML & DW would be doing if still running the club, they are not. The only thing that counts is what IL does now he is the owner.

Off the field it's clear things are moving in the right direction (Mick Hogan etc). Playing wise including, the coach, on field and recruitment it isn't.

Dave

Well if TL is to stay at scrumhalf he isn't good enough IMHO.

If he is to play at hooker he leaves the pack underweight.

Our pack is badly short of some 'grunt' in the front row.

Tommy is one of the 'biggest' tacklers in our team, just ask mary

As do I. However your reasoning re: why he will be played at 7 next season is entirely flawed! Firstly isn't he already being used at interchange hooker despite not having a viable alternative at half (unless you count Smith's last performance), giving at least some indication that this is at least being considered as his main position. Also, as everyone, yourself included, considers Smith to be amongst the most likely to return home next season, isn't it most likely that we would be looking to replace a departing half with an incoming half, rather than some convoluted, made up reasoning of your own to argue that TL will remain at 7? After all it's not as if we haven't already made some effort to bring a SO in this season (Bird/Carney) let alone next!

Your arguments making TL's resigning to be a bad one simply don't hold water yet you argue them as if they were fact and present the signing as a negative based on nothing but flawed hypothesis! Let's put it this way, if TL weren't already signed and we anounced the signing of the World cup winning hooker for next season, would you seriously be arguing it as a backward step?

Utter boll0cks mate.

Tommy isn’t smaller than the likes of Buderus, Smith, Farrar and Isaac Luke who are all top draw hookers.

How can you say that when we've got 'Piggy' there !!!


I'll get me coat.

I have been on here about a year now and reading it for 3 years or so and thats one of the best posts ever made.

I would like to add that we should support the coach and players who are here if we like them or not, at the end of the day Noble and Fielden who have taken stick are our players so lets encourage what we have rather than wish we had what we cant.

Noble is definately Maurice Bamford!!!

How many Jimmy Berts has he signed in his time and proceeded to consistantly play when everyone else can see their failings?!?!?

Mathers, Pryce, Coley, Fielden, Withers, Millard etc!!!

I always remember a Wigan fan shouting to Bamford....'Get back to Moscow, you commie bugger'. (In reference to his resemblance to Lech Walesa)

And take Jimmy Birts back with you