I know what you mean, but standards have declined massively over the last decade... and the judging of the MOS has been ridiculous at times... the Slug has been MOS... a substitute won it ahead of Barrett...

He is the best in class. The fact that the class is underperforming isn't his fault.Lockers would be a deserved winner of this award IMO if he can keep up this level of performance. Maybe with some better players around him he could get closer to the standards of the Wigan legends whose boots he is trying to fill.

?

Which of the above do you NOT consider a better player at 13 than Locky?

I am intrigued.


The point of my post is that SL has dumbed down to such an extent that some people hail Locky as a "class" player. To me he is average.


Anyway back to my question.

Which 2 do you think are worse 13's than Locky.

Please don't say Bell and Goodway as I will laugh myself to sleep.

Think i clearly stated Cassidy and Barrie Jon Mathers in my opinion both backrow forwards were worse players than Locky. I would suggest if these 2 players were able to play first team rugby in 94 in the backrow so would Locky, hence he would not be "lucky" to play in the reserves as you stated.

Personally I would rather have Cassidy than Lockers.

BJM ...........hardly a regular at 13 was he?


OK R-TARD my patience is exhausted with you. You are an idiot.


1. Henry Paul (1 try)
2. Jason Robinson (2 tries)
3. Va'aiga Tuigamala (1 try)
4. Gary Connolly
5. Martin Offiah
6. Frano Botica (5 goals)
7. Shaun Edwards (c)
8. Kelvin Skerrett
9. Martin Hall (1 try)
10. Neil Cowie
11. Denis Betts
12. Mick Cassidy
13. Phil Clarke

* Andy Farrell
* Paul Atcheson



Tell me exactly how Lockers would get close to that team?


No answer?

I thought not.

Now go away you irritating little person.

Mate for such a great debater you do not half get wound up when you make silly statements, and even resort to replying for me!

You said Locky would be lucky to play reserve rugby.

I highlighted 2 players in Mathers and Cassidy who played first team rugby in the backrow in 94 who most sensible posters without an anti Locky agenda as they have been shown up after years of slating him, would not rate as highly as Locky. As these lads played first team in 94 in the secondrow how would Locky "be lucky to play in the reserves?" genuine question.

Can i expect an answer without the keyboard warrior response or shall i just await the usual straw clutching abuse of my spelling? Either way hardly traits of one who considers himself such a great debater.

Put Cassidy in this side now and he'd look nothing but average.

He did a job in a great team but O'Loughlin would have done that job and much much more besides.

A far better player.

Ok so you would have Lockers over Cassidy.


.....................fine.

I can only assume you were too young to appreciate Cassidy.


But hey, it's a free country. You are entitled to your opinon.

I think most would. I think you are perhaps too bound by your agenda against Locky to appreciate him.

Do you stand by the statement that Locky would be lucky to play reserve rugby 15 years ago?

I'm a big supporter of Lockers. I feel very sorry for the guy. He's wearing a shirt that two of the greatest players in modern RL have worn, the incomparable Hanley and the man who carried our entire team for a decade, Andy Farrell.

My view is that Lockers isn't up to the standard of Hanley or Farrell. That's not much of a criticism. Since Jason Robinson left for RU only KFC (when fit) has been able to play at a similar level to those two. Hanley and Farrell are immense figures in RL terms. Talk about massive boots to fill. When you factor in the other great players that have played LF for Wigan in the modern era, e.g. Goodway and Clarke, and the awesome legends that have been club captain - leaders like Edwards and Bell - you have to feel sorry for the guy, with the lack of quality in the current side.

That said, how good is Lockers? Better than Cassidy in my book. Mick Cassidy was a great tackler and an underrated player but Lockers is a much classier player. Is Lockers as good as Clarke or Goodway? Possibly not but to be fair to the lad, with the exception of Hock the pack he is leading is really poor compared with the great forward packs of the late 80s and early 90s. With better players around him he would, I'm sure, look a better player. Only Faz could carry this current mediocre pack and he was a once in a lifetime player.

Also out of interest why do you rate Cassidy over Locky, what does Cassidy bring to the table that Locky does not in your opinion and visa versa?

Yes.

He would not get into the starting 15/17 that's for sure.


I have no agenda against Locky for the record.

I just don't think he is good enough, and I CERTAINLY don't think he is as good as most on this forum/in RL circles generally feel.


I am clearly opening myself up to all sorts of "So you don't think he's as good as former/present GB coaches etc etc" but I call it as I see it.


Frankly it's a sad indictment of our game that Locky is considered a candidate for the GB/England 13 shirt, given the quality of the past incumbents.

I say again, if he was born in Sydney, we would never have heard of him.

O'Loughlin is an absolutely class player, shown by the step up he makes with better players around him at international level. To say that he's not good enough is an absolutely ludicrous statement, and i doubt "most people" would agree with you.

So you think he would be lucky to play in the reserves in 94?

What did Cassidy offer that Locky does not and visa versa that in your opinion makes him a superior player?

Nice to see you have reigned in the keyboard warrior stuff by the way Henry Low would be proud although you did fall to your second trademark "help line" trying to use age to discredit someone who does not agree with you, which is another sign of desperation.

Shame he didn't do it last week



But seriously people like him, Morley etc should be in line to win the MOS but because they don't play for St Helen's or Leeds that rules them out instantly

For me Locky works his t*ts off in defence, we all see that, but he is nowhere near enough of an attacking talent to get close to a chance of being man of steel.

Have to disagree Bilko. Some of Locky's long passes are amazing balls - continually put people in for tries and his drive and offload capability is Farrell-esque.

I've read the first two pages of this thread and almost wet myself laughing. In those pages only there's a significant number of his former 'doubters' asking where his 'doubters' are.

Only RLFANs.

I'll tell you the odd one out. Lockers. He's the only one who didn't have the luxury of playing in our 'great sides'. Get a grip BK. Even you must be able to see the bias in that post!!!

I'm not too young to appreciate Cassidy. Saw his entire career and rate him very highly. Not a patch on O'Loughlin though. You keep giving us players from those great sides to compare Lockers too. Turn those tables and tell me just how good you think Cassidy would have been in the current side. Do you think, week in week out, that he would be the standout player? If you do, your rose tinted spectacles need replacing...

But is BK's opinion really so out of touch with what a lot of supporters really think?

Many of us admire his defence and value his commitment to the cause but if Locky left the club tomorrow would he be hard to replace?

Was he difficult to replace last season when he picked up the injury?

Please don't use that hackneyd old argument. We didn't miss Barrett when he was out last year, but we've missed him this. And how can you say we didn't miss him. How do you know how we would have gone with him in the side!

Hard to replace? Yes! I can't think of a better British back row forward in the game.

Not sure what this has got to do with Barrett?

I think Tompkins more than filled in for Locky last season, so much so that many people where calling for Joel to start ahead of Locky at the start of 2009.

Im not calling Locky a bad player but ive yet to be convinced that he is anything special.

Very true.

Its the same with the Brian Noble debate.

we won 11 out of our 1st 17 games with him last season.

We won 6 of our last 16 games without him last season

ANY coach in SL would have him in their team.

If he had played in the teams from 85 - 95 we would be thinking of him in the same breath as Phil Clarke and Andy Goodway.

Yes, Farrell & Hanley were better, But tey were also Better than ANYTHING that Britain has produced (Along with Sculthorpe although in his first 2 x seasons I saw Lockers outplay Scully a couple of times but that's what playing in a Very Good Team can make a player look like!) for 35/40 years!

Lockers is a Very Good player, a "Great" No, Not Yet as a Trophy will be required to do that but he is as Much if not more than any other Wigan player doing his best to put that right!

Probabaly the 1st name on the Team Sheet Every Week!

It's exactly the same argument as you're using for O'Loughlin. We didn't miss Barrett when he was out...in fact we had one of our best wins at Leeds when he was injured. Are you saying the argument only applies to O'Loughlin? If you want to use that argument it has to apply to all players. The simple fact is, of course, you can't use that argument at all as this is a team game and if one individual in a 17 man team can't be covered for by the inclusion of another player, that team is in massive trouble!

On the second point, are you suggesting that Joel Tompkins is currently better than O'loughlin?

I'm assuming not, in which case the point about him being able to replace him is self evidently wrong....