We'll agree to disagree on Connolly but you do realise you're arguing against yourself if that's what you think, don't you? Why would moving an outstanding fullback to centre make sense if moving a good winger to centre doesn't? You can't argue it both ways.

Robinson did indeed play a number of games at full back in both codes and didn't excel in either. You may as well argue Budgie has played several times at centre..

I don't want this discussion to get muddied though so rather than discuss the merits of individual positional swaps let me ask you this: What do you think we stand to lose from trying Budgie at centre (not thrown in this season btw) given we have an abundance of quality wingers and are struggling at centre?

There's two points.

-The players you name are world class and could play a number of positions, Connolly, Robinson etc. Using them as examples of successful positional changes is invalid, they could play anywhere. Connolly wasn't a good fb? I question how many times you watched him play there. Robinson; to be selected at club and country as a fb outlines his achievements there. If your examples would have been of players who were poor, then became stars once changed position; it would have made more sense than naming stars who can play a number of positions.

-Leave Burgess on the wing, he's the best winger we have. crazy to move him. Let him develop via game time and experience on the wing. Don't mess him around when he's excelling on the wing.

Here's an idea, sign a centre.

I didn't say it did - I just said that Richards was brought by Millward and he tried to convert him to centre when he had only played Wing previously.
It didn't work and he moved back to Wing quite successfully (He also played a bit of FB 07ish but it was quite clearly Wing was hi best position).
This is what I believe to be Joe's best position - Nothing more nothing less.

Budgie was awful in defence when he played at centre. it's not all about making tries but stopping them as well. He seemed to lack the positional knowledge of where he had to be when defending at centre.

So no actual reasons for that belief then. Fair enough. Not really sure how to counter that other than to say that clearly his best position is currently wing but I still don't see why that would preclude him being equally effective as a centre given time, training and experience in that position. It seems you don't either so I guess that's the end of that particular discussion.

But as said earlier, being thrown into an injury ravaged team that was playing badly while injured yourself and with no real previous experience or preparation, that's not a surprise. I cannot say with any certainty that he would make the transition but equally it can't be said that he wouldn't.

However the point is, having given Marshall and Davies long term contracts and the possibility of Manfredi's return, not to mention a couple good prospects in the junior ranks, that someone will have to make a positional change (or lose players, of course). The only question is who looks the most likely candidate.

I didn't have that belief, you put thise words down attributed them to me and I hadn't said them.
To be fair as I said earlier I wasn't so much arguing with your point but just saying that 2/3 times you said I'd said something that I hadn't. That's all.

Budgie has played centre at junior level, academy level etc.
He currently could "Do a job" there.
But currently he's a far better winger than he is centre or full back.

We currently have 3 1st team wingers, saints have 3, most teams do, I don't thinknthats excessive.
You talk about having to lose players because we have 3.
What happens if one gets injured and we only have 1 with no other juniors currently in the frame to step up?
We play budgie centre and we have 3 x centre's, do we let 1 of the others go and only have 2? (what do we do then if budgie and say gildart get injured and we have no back up?).

Wigan have built up a squad of players and I'm over the moon that currently for the first time in 2 years we have fit players and competition for places, I see that as a positive not a problem.

Correct. We can’t count Manfredi because we don’t know when he’ll be fit again, how long it will take him to get back to match fitness, if he’ll ever be as good as he was, and also allowing as much time as he needs to get back without having to rush him back.

When is Budgies contract up? I know he fancies another crack at Australia and indeed was offered a contract by Souths last time he was over there. It's a measure of the man that he said no because he had promised Rads he would come back to Wigan and didn't want to back on his word.

End of November 2019 (3 yr deal)

With all due respect JS I'm not putting any words in your mouth. I asked for reasons why you thought he wouldn't make a centre and you offered none. It was therefore reasonable to conclude that you had none. If you think he would make a centre; then what are we even arguing about?

With regards to the number of wingers we have you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of (although that's common place on this board so I'm not exactly shocked!). Nowhere have I said that he should be given a run at centre now. Quite the contrary in fact. I have stated on several occasions that it's a decision for the future so our standing regarding wingers currently available is, to use Dave's favourite phrase, a complete straw man argument.

I'll reiterate. Down the line, having signed Marshall and Davies long term and with Manfredi's possible return, plus a couple of junior players coming through we are likely to have a surfeit of wingers. Currently the same can't be said of centres

One more point. Saying 'if we use Budgie at centre we will also have 3' is yet another straw man argument as I have never said having 3 wingers or centres is a bad thing. In fact would you please quote where I have? There is nothing wrong with having 3 just as there is nothing wrong with having 3 wingers. The simple fact is, however, that the current squad (when fully fit) is heavy on first team wingers and light on first team centres. Or do you disagree?

Well, apart from there being lots of inaccuracies in this post relating to what I did or didn't say and then being called pedantic for actually pointing out that I hadn't said the things you said I had, there's not much else to say I suppose.
I'd just rather be criticised for something I did actually say rather than what I hadn't

Numerous times I've pointed out that Budgie's best position is Wing - I personally believe that will be the case for most if not all of his career in the main.
Whether someone else or the coaches see it that way only time will tell & to be honest IMO it's not really a debate for now that interests me.
Manfredi is out of anyone's plans for now - So that makes it 2 centres & 3 wingers in the 1st team - We use Budgie primarily as a Centre and we have the same problem but only with 2 wingers only. So I don't see that as solving a problem (Touch wood if Manfredi comes back at some point that may beg the question - for now, for me, it's neither either nor there).
Although I again didn't say that you said it was a bad or a good thing - I just said that I don't think having 3 x primarily wingers on the books (With 2 not being on top dollar) is excessive.

Currently he's one of our best 2 wingers (Davies being my option on the right)
Currently if Sarge/Gildart are fit they play centre for me & Marshall misses out on the Wing.
Sarge not fit I'd play Bateman
Gildart not fit I'd possibly look at Joe and bring Marshall in on wing (Assuming both wingers are fit). If one of the wingers not fit I'd be tempted to leave Budgie on Wing and look for other centre options.

Let me know if this is ok?

FWIW I think Burgess has the rugby brain and physique to make a very good centre. At the moment he is only able to fill in there. To make the transition it would probably need a couple of pre-seasons with a full season in between and a lot of patience, in effect he would be learning a new (albeit similar) trade.

If we signed him up long term with no NRL clauses imo it would be worth putting the effort in. As he has previously said he’d like to go back to Australia I’d say it’s not worth the effort.

Well summarised

Unfortunately all points relating to Budgie moving to centre NOW. I have never advocated this. As I said previously, quite the reverse in fact. I also would rather discuss what I actually said so I guess the discussion is over.

Just for clarity though (and feel free to PM me rather than clog this thread up any further) would you mind letting me know where I have quoted you as saying something you haven't? I've just reread the posts and I can't see a single example .

Fair point mate. Why do you think it would take a couple pre seasons though? Changes like this are usually made over the course of a single preseason and, as you say, Budgie seems to have a good rugby brain.

Just a couple recent examples to illustrate the point: Sam changed from half to fullback in the preseason following Madge's appointment. You could even argue that JB made international centre with just the pretournament as preparation.

I'm not saying you're wrong, necessarily, but I am interested as to why you think it would take Budgie longer?

Just an opinion of course. The way Sam was asked to play at full back is very similar to an old school #6 which is where he had played and trained throughout his youth. Where he had to adapt was the defensive side and that showed at the start with him moving to the wing and Richards covering some of his duty. I’d say it took Sam at least 2 years to adapt to the defensive side.

Centre and wing are vastly different, I may be way off here but budgie to me seems to be prone to a loss of confidence and I think is less adaptable so naturally it would take him longer.

He was tried at centre for a run of games last season, he looked a million miles off, in attack and more evidently in defence. The role is massively different. Reminded me of how Pat Richards was when tried at centre.

I don't get this obsession with moving Burgess to centre. (I know it's not you mate) It's like someone's looked at his size and pace, saw his hand off and breaks v Cas, factored in that we have Davies and Marshall and come to a conclusion he could be a centre.

It's as if people don't get how different the positions are.

Long term it’s something I’d consider but in the shorter term he needs to stay on the wing where he’s just started to get back to something like his best. He’s benefitting more then most from the competition for places as I feel he’s the type of lad that needs to be pushed and there’s improvement in him yet.

Ultimately he’s our best winger both in regards to natural talent and current form so I wouldn’t rock the boat. In saying that I also wouldn’t rule out a future at centre for him down the line because he has the size and the skills to maybe be a success in that position but the time isn’t right to try that currently imo.

I agree with this NK. An additional benefit, should he make the move successfully, would be at international level where the dearth of quality is arguably worse than at club level.

Of course we get that the positions have differences! I'd say more defensively than in attack. If you think he'd struggle at centre in attack you need only take a look at Friday. He attacked through the centre channels, beating the opposition centre with a man outside him (you know.. like a winger!) and on both occasions showed the awareness to set up his winger (sic) to score! This was against one of the top sides in the league generally noted for their tight defence. This is far from the first time he's shown such awareness in setting up others for tries. What part of the blindingly obvious are you struggling with there?

As for defense, I agree he hasn't shown the same natural propensity for the position but in mitigation we've only seen him at this level in an injury ravaged team with inexperience outside him. As has been said many times about bringing youngsters into the team, it's a completely different proposition when there is a full team of experienced players around you. The same argument is equally applicable to positional switches.

I am certainly not advocating a move now but, down the line, a simple look at our playing roster would suggest it's something worth looking at. You could argue that people's obsession with not considering positional changes, even when it would plainly benefit the club, is the unfathomable one.

It's worrying how you watched the game on Friday and from that came to the conclusion that Burgess could be a good centre. The highlights of his tries could be attributed to centre play, I get that, from his position and how he dealt with Webster was it? But a 10 second snapshot falls very short in comparison to his spell, game after game of watching him at centre. You mention how the skills of a centre in attack, these are a million miles away from that of a winger, how you're positioned, ball skills the lot.

And for defence, you mention he had an inexperienced winger outside him, that winger was Marshall, who do you think would be playing outside of him if you moved him into the centres? That same winger.

I'm not against positional play, but only if it makes sense. Trying to covert our best winger to a centre doesn't.

Wakefield complain about the size of Castleford pitch and what do they do bring in Wigan must really have some grudge against us.


Wigan Warriors play on a field that is not legal according to RL laws. They play on a ground measuring 105 metres which according to the RL law should be a maximum of 100 metres, with a 6 metre in goal area behind the posts.
The minimum requirements are 94 metres between posts, Castleford play on an legal pitch, and always cheating Wigan play on an illegal pitch. Will Eddie or his mates ever pick up on this.

By ‘Wakefield’ do you mean one of their supporters or the club itself. Assuming the second paragraph is a quote I’d be very concerned over the language used.

Interesting point though, I can’t be bothered to look up the RFL rules however on google maps the distance between the posts does measure 104.95m. So assuming the above is correct and the maximum length is 100m then we are indeed over.

To be fair, although legal, the Castleford pitch is laughably small.

I was thinking "No wonder Gale kicks loads of 40/20s". We kick way fewer, but the pitch we play on is huge in comparison to Castleford's.