As well as not having the big game experience I think what some are getting at, and I agree is he doesn’t have the first team experience in general. He’s on his breakthrough year and although he’s playing very well he’s still only a kid with a handful of games.

For me, excepting the odd once in a generation type, players need to perform at club level for at least a couple of seasons before throwing them into internationals.

What do you want a coach for every position? Our coaches are Winder & Wane.
A good coach with support has to cover all positions and all aspects of the game.
A coach can only help to improve a player the most important factor is that a player must want to improve himself.
My downside with Williams is that I am not sure how much he wants to really improve himself. I don't know the lad to ask him but I haven't seen one aspect of his game improve in nearly 2 years.

You've have the in-form half play a couple of seasons before calling up for an international spot? Madness. Form, ability should be rewarded. So you'd pick another player who wasn't playing as well just because they've played a couple of seasons?
That's like saying you'd pick Boyd over Ponga or Josh Reynolds over Nathan Cleary.

Deary me. Let's look at it another way.

Saints have Long (played in the halves)
Leeds have Eaton (played in the halves)
Warrington have Price (played in the halves)

That's not even discussing the NRL teams. Not uncommon for teams to have past players who either specialise with backs play and even more so, halves. In union they take it either further.

Lots of posters on here credit Madge with Wigan's top performances (for which I agree) but there is also something to be said about how our attacking play has dropped since the departures of first Harris then Deacon (both who were very good backs/halves in their day)

Also, when did I say I want a coach for every position?

Yes I would. Oh btw, Nathan Cleary is in his 3rd season and has played 48 games for Penrith, twice that of Richardson so bad choice there. Ponga is in his second season though played limited 1st team rugby last year. There is a lot of debate as to whether he can handle it. If it wasn’t a gamble playing Ponga then Queensland would have picked him for the first game.

At last. Thanks for giving me your opinion. For me, he isn't the best hb in the comp this season. If Gale was fit he wouldn't get into the national side on this form, irrespective of stats. That, however, doesn't equate to me wanting him to leave. I just want him to play to his potential.
As to your hypothetical question of a replacement, who knows? As with Sam, home grown marquee players offer excellent value in terms of salary cap and for that reason are well worth keeping. However, I personally will judge them on a performance v (assumed) salary basis. Is Williams worth £75k on the cap? Certainly. Is he playing this season like someone on north of £175k? Not in my opinion.

Thank god you've nothing to do with selection, picking on SL experience over form.
48 games in 3 seasons. Exactly. How many does that compare to Josh Reynolds? Thanks the whole point, form v experience.

There's also a lot of discussion of how picking an experienced 6 as a FB for Queensland was a massive error, saw QLD suffering a big loss by Origin standards. PS I said Boyd v Ponga if you recall. Both eligible fullbacks for QLD.

Deary me you like an argument don't you



Probably the greatest coach we ever had and most certainly the greatest that Saints ever had was Jim Sullivan who only ever played full back in an era when full backs hardly ever got their hands on the ball but he didn't do so bad with Alex Murphy did he?

The gist of my earlier post is that players can do a lot to help themselves either with or without a coach.
Good coaches help improve a player they don't make a player. A good coach can and will improve a team but he also needs the right players to do that.

So you have a half coach at Leeds who has Moon as his 6 what the hell is the coach going to do with a player who has zero instinct for a half, has the passing ability of a poor U13's player and whose kicking game is non existent? Leeds will have to recruit a six or bring one through the system as Moon will never make a half as long as he has an hole up his harris and no coach is going to change that.

Overly zealous coaches are part of the reason for me in the decline of the entertainment in the sport. They want to try and dictate every single facet of every single play. Teach young guys the basics and good skill sets, give them a a game plan and for god's sake give them the latitude to play the game as they see it not purely by numbers and that for me would be good coaching.

By the way I wouldn't have Long gift wrapped with a bugle up his harris playing Dixie in our coaching set up even if he could improve our style play.

I just like responding to posters who challenge my points to generate a discussion, remember, this has all come from me asking 'who is our halves/backs coach'. That's all.

Remind me, when did Sullivan play/coach again? And wasn't he a back?

Your argument/discussion is really weak. All good players massively benefit from a good coach who fully understands what they must do in a game and what is needed in their game to improve. Richardson at Saints and Matty Smith both massively praised Long on how he developed aspects of their game, it's common sense that he would improve them!
Williams has ability but lets be honest, would massively improve under a good backs/half coach, that's why I asked who our backs coach was, that's all I originally asked remember?

Your section on Moon is baffling. Are you saying because they have a coach who played in the halves isn't helping Moon? (You question his passing and state they must sign a new 6?) Random! (PS Didn't Leeds win a GF with Moon at 6? Asking for a friend).

PS I still don't know if we as a potential backs/halves coach. Point is, I believe a good one, could help improve Williams and Powell. Surely that's common sense?

As a neutral (rhinos) throughly enjoyed this posting. You are also spot on with your moon comment.

48 games in the NRL in 2 and a bit seasons makes him a first team regular for 2 and a bit seasons. That’s the point I was making, he’s not a kid in his breakthrough year as Richardson is. The comparison with Reynolds is irrelevant as I was comparing Richardson with Cleary.

As for the second paragraph, I don’t have the slightest clue what your point is.

Itchy is right though, you do like an argument.

Haha! I guess I better stop posting then. (But then who would help you understand basic points? Hmm...

Seems like I'm going to have to break this down to help you understand. Point is form v experience. You need to compare one v the other. My argument is that players should be picked on form. You 'appear' to edge for experience. So let's break it down. NSW half back spot. Cleary (form) v Reynolds (experience) I pointed you in this direction as it's another argument to support why players should be picked on form.

Richardson represents 'form' as he's the form half back. But you strangely want him to play for another 2 to 3 seasons first. While in the meantime England select whoever else even thought they're not the form halfback.

We are bouncing around a bit LSOW but let me try and respond to your comments.

Does it matter when Sullivan coached?? A good coach is a good coach in any generation. He was a full back and virtually rescued St Helens from oblivion and helped make Alex Murphy probably the greatest ever half back in the history of the game in the UK and you could argue in the world of RL. I had the pleasure of meeting with him and his wife over 40 years ago and his passion for the game was totally captivating. He lavished praise on "Spud Murphy" and looked for no complements on his role in developing Murphy.

To put it bluntly Moon is useless at half back. He could have a coach with on the pitch and it still wouldn't improve him one little dot. He is an athlete trying to play a role way beyond his capabilities. Its like Shwarzenegger playing Macbeth, he can give it a go but give me Olivier any day of the week. Olivier could feed the lines to Shwarzenegger but could he still play the part?

Why do only halves need a specialist coach?? Why not a centre? It is a particularly hard position to play well so why not bring in a specialist coach for that position? The hooking role continues to develop year on year so why not bring in a specialist for that too?

Our coaches as stated previously are Winder & Wane therefore, they are our halves coach and every other position. I would not disagree that this combination doesn't work particularly from an entertainment point of view but technically I couldn't really answer that with any authority but personally I think we are way overdue a change in style, intensity and philosophy of how the game should be played.

The thrust of my comments is that a coach alone cannot do everything. A player to reach the very top must have than inner belief and desire to go extra mile to improve his and his team's performance and regarding Williams I just don't know if he has that in him. Sullivan made Murphy cry during some of their one on one sessions due to the exceptionally high intensity and expectations of Sullivan's demands which he responded to and quite rightly earned all of the accolades.

So do we have a backs coach? Still no answer, instead waffle.

I had the courtesy to reply to your post and you describe my reply as waffle so why the football echo should I keep replying to you because either you don't understand or more than likely don't want to understand. It's probably neither because you just want everyone to agree to your opinion and cannot see the reason why someone else would have a different point of view.

I'll keep it s i m p l e for you the coaches are W i n d e r & W a n e for ALL positions.

If you are going to challenge people (which I think is good by the way) and someone replies at least have the dignity and nous to explain why you disagree with their response. I think responded to all of your points and tried to give rationale to my reasoning and how I formed my opinions to which you responded with a single sentence summarised as waffle. If I were you I wouldn't be in a hurry to join any debating societies.

Ok, I'll entertain you.

1) Of course it matters when Sullivan coached. The game evolves in all facets.
2) So you're now saying a good coach can improve backs? (Thank you for supporting one of my points)
3) I'm pleased you had a good time when you met him
4) The Moon bit is very confusing. Are you now saying a coach can't improve players? (contradicts point 2) Lots of arguments to say a backs coach/halves can improve players. Why just focus on Moon?
5) A centre is also a back. I asked about a backs/halves coach.
6) 'the trust of my comments is that a coach cannot do everything'- then maybe we should have a backs coach or at least someone in the coaching staff who knows said role/roles? Like the examples I previous gave.
7) Make your mind up. One minute you're saying a player can't be improved the next you'e banging on about Sullivan improving Murphy.


Unless you know George Williams personally or professionally as part of the Wigan setup refrain from speculating about his 'inner believe and 'desire'. Apart from it being insulting, it's completely based upon nothing substantial and makes your points look a little shallow.

Bottomline. I asked if we had a backs coach/someone with knowledge of the role as I believe our attacking play and especially halfback play has devolved in recent years under Wane. I wanted to know who it was, as from my recollection there's no one since Harris and then Deacon.
I don't think it's out of the question to suggest our halves need help with their game. Equally I don't think it's wrong to suggest said players would improve with more specialist help from those in the know.

But of course, I just like to argue don't I.
Or could it be, my suggestions aren't actually that controversial or outlandish after all.

I wouldn’t want to come in between your debate gents but I don’t think it’s just coincidence that we played some of our best rugby under SW when we had Harris and Deacon supporting him. I’d say a backs coach would have improved us. It’s like saying a kicking coach won’t improve a kicker, Of course they would!

It's clear Wanes strength is defence and getting them fired up. We haven't played good attractive rugby for a while. So yes I do think we have suffered since decided not to replace Deacon.

And yet you obviously don’t understand my basic point. You talk about form v experience and then start referencing players who have had 10 years at the top level.

All my point was is that i disagree with throwing a rookie who has only played about half a season into international rugby. Richardson doesn’t represent form, he represents a kid who is in his breakthrough year in a good side playing without the pressure of expectation. If he can back that up next year then we should start thinking about international rugby.

We missed Wiliams last night. Josh Woods ran for a game total of 7 metres, that's almost Matty Smith esque.

Of course we missed him. I dont think anyone has said we wouldn't or that he should have been dropped.

People have simply pointed out he's playing well below his potential.

Does that not point to him being told to just feed his half partner or feed his back row. I have seen Woods play looks to like to have the ball in his hands and create something. 7 metres tells me he was told to catch and pass. From an outsider it seems your halves are as shackled as your props by Wane's tactics. As an aside and from the limited time I have seen Williams (only on TV) he seems to have grown a bit more stocky and his strength of running with the ball I see him as a possible future 9. As a neutral but as an England fan I would love him to take games by the scruff of the neck and become the half he threatened to be, but his game is just frustrating to watch at the minute and seems to lack that instinct of when to give the ball and when to go himself to genuinely take him to the next level

The problem with having an organising half and a running half is that they have to play as a pair and unfortunately we play with split halves. Even Edwards and Gregory would have been shackled playing the way we do now. We either have to accept Powell/Shorrocks/ Woods as organising halves and play them as a pair with GW or get two halves with fully rounded games (can organise, tackle, run, catch, pass and kick) to play left and right. Shorrocks was the nearest to this pre injury. I also like the looks of Harry Smith in the U19s.

Aaron Bower reporting Catalans have made a big money approach for Williams. Looking to recruit him for next season.

Well we know he was over there a couple of weeks back so it comes as little surprise.

If he does go then serious questions will need to be asked. It looks like we’re drastically cutting costs.