Not really. Its the constant changes in the backline that is killing us. Mock all you like but we had Hopoate, Percival, Hurrell, Dodd, LMS out on Saturday and then lost Makinson during the game, all of whom make the first choice 17.

Yes Catalans were missing a few too however they had six of their seven starting backs all playing, first choice front row and Whitley in the back row. All our injuries are mainly in the backs.

The annoying part about Saturday was that it was obvious Napa and McIllorum would receive bans (refer to tribunal and 3 games respectively) yet only Warrington will benefit. We don't, at least one should have been a red card and its the inconsistency that's annoying as earlier in the season, one or both would've walked.

You could argue that Wigan's changes have made you stronger. Certainly KPP replacing Thornley and Smith coming in are two examples where the replacements are better than the initial first choice players.

Wonder if they'll start with Walmsley and Paasi to try and rack up a big lead in the opening 25. I'm surprised Woolf hasn't tried it before now - when Saints used to start with Walmsley and Thompson it would be a nightmare for their opponents.

All in jest and in the spirit of Derby week. I wouldn’t say you’ve had it tough in comparison to some teams but it’s certainly been tougher than recent seasons for you and disruptive. We’ve done the Saints injury debate to death but there’s no doubt in my mind that this season has been a poor one by Saints recent standards when it comes to injury luck but you’ve still probably one of the lesser disrupted clubs (as have we).

I don’t recall the Lees incident tbh although as I said earlier, I think he’s quite sloppy with his technique sometimes. I don’t ever think he’s dirty as such but he makes so much contact with his shoulder and when shoulder charges are banned, he does well to avoid much scrutiny. Ligi Sao at Hull FC is even worse and very rarely seems to get pinned.

To be fair though Stu, we had this conversation pre season and were mocked by some for saying our depth was better than yours. I remember FTV being quite scathing about it being average replacements for average players. Well i really don't think (as you quite rightly say) that the likes of Smith and KPP have been average or that French for Field at fullback, for example, has been average player for average player. In fact we're talking some of the best players in Superleague thus far. It's hardly surprising that some are taking the opportunity to throw a few back at (some) Saints fans.

I get it mate. We are there to be shot at no doubt. We’ve definitely lost some of the at times “invincibility” we had and the chopping and changing every week has added to that. Unless we get a settled side we’ll struggle to do the 4 in a row although admittedly we are still exceptionally hard to beat.

It’s why Roby didn’t fall for Peets praise a few weeks ago when he was fawning over Saints and said Wigan are still some way behind. They aren’t far behind at all and are more than capable of winning the comp this season.

I actually feel you’ll win on Saturday too, may have too much pace for us. That’s not to say I wouldn’t be confident in a knock out game or GF with a full side but I can see us losing a close one on Saturday.

It's an absolute no-brainer not to change the spine around when we're in good form and leave things just as they are, especially for such a big game. Only point for debate here IMO is whom out of Tommy & Cust gets the bench spot. Personally (on the basis they're both fit) I'd go with Tommy. Ultimate big game player & steady head...without him we wouldn't have won the cup.

Sounds like Tommy is done for a few weeks with a calf problem but Cust may be in contention.

I think I agree - but I'll wait and see what team you put out first (and to a lesser extent, see which troops we have coming back).

I still think that with close to a fully fit squad, Saints are the best team in the league by a decent margin. I think the fact that we won the last encounter, especially in the way that we did will give you another little bit of motivation. It's real progress from a Wigan perspective though that it only takes a bad (but not horrendous) set of injuries to make us favourites, as there were times last season where it looked like we were playing different sports.

Disagree that it's a no brainer - Smith obviously is a nailed on starter now but I think you can still make a very good case for putting Field back at fullback and move French over to the wing. Harsh on Miski but it's clearly our strongest back three, and whilst Field hasn't let anyone down in the halves, it's obviously not his strongest position.

Main worry I'd have with including Cust is that he's not played since the final, but on balance I think I'd still start him if he's ready.

At times last season we were missing our entire 1-5 as well as our first choice 7. For most of the season we had a SR in the centres. Nobody gave us any sympathy so don't expect any back. Saints are now going through what every club in the league has gone through every season.

Saints have barely had an injury for 3 years and now a couple have popped up they are claiming a crisis, they still include Lomax on their injured list despite him not missing a game.

Whereas Wigan have missed Hardaker, Thornley and KPP in the backs for most of the year, Bevan French wasn’t here for the first 6 weeks of the year, played a rookie at 9 for 6 weeks (knocked them out the cup and won the final in the process) and have quietly dealt without their 2 starting half backs since the final.

I’m sure the greatest team in the super dooper league era can handle a few injuries.

I think French brings others into play better from fullback than Field, and Field brings other players into play better at 6 than he does from fullback.

Field’s best attribute at fullback is his kick return when it’s a poor one and the chase is fragmented. Doesn’t happen often with Saints that…so much so that they’ve pretty much managed to alleviate that element of his threat thus far this season when we’ve played them. As 2nd receiver I think he poses a real threat to Saints if (and it’s a big if) we can get on the front foot and roll off the back of a few quick plays.

This for me too. At the very least I'd like to take a look at this option against Saints as it matters less if we lose this one than if we lose any future game this season... although it goes without saying that I'd prefer not to lose any! I do feel the pace of Field in the halves and the elusiveness of French at the back could be more effective against them than sheer pace at the back and a lesser opportunity to use French's elusiveness from the wing and, as I say, I'd at least like to try it. Putting Cust on the bench gives us chance to shake things up if necessary whilst at the same time easing him back in after what has been a longish lay off. We also get the extra option at Hooker if needed.

Wouldn't disagree with any of that to be fair. But Cust brings more in the halves than Field does, and we are a better side with all of Cust, Field and French in the side.

It might turnout that Peet doesn't want to change the spine of a winning team, or risk bringing Cust back too quickly for a game like this, and that's fair enough if he goes down that path. My point is just that we'll probably need to be near our best to beat Saints, even with their injuries, so keeping one of our key playmakers out of the team is a big call.

The dilema that SO coaches have, the usual decision get all of the best players in the team, even if that means playing some out of their club/best position. I would like to see Cust at dummy half but that may not be the best idea coming back from a dislocation