If it was an issue with Sean O'Loughlin being the current captain why not just speak to him, take it off him, and give it to someone else? MM doesnt seem like the kind of guy who would díck about and cover something up with this just because he see's Lockers not fit for captaincy.
Its nothing like that, its just MM trying something new - personally i cant see a negative side to it. If it works then fantastic but if it doesnt, its not going to change anything in a bad way.

I seem to remember the St Helens 'messiah', Alex Murphy, asking similar questions of Wigan's decision to start using game-plans. But it wasn't long before the messiah had gone and Saints were doing exactly as Wigan were.

For me the 5 would be Lockers, Bails, Tommy, Deacon, Tomkins

Swap Tomkins for Fielden would be my choice, will be interesting of whom MM selects.

the players voted on it not mm

....It messes up our start to the season, undermines O'Loughlin's authority and McGuire's honeymoon period ends abruptly.

For me the captaincy is what tomkins needs.....Hes a natural captain and a natural leader and the player to take on the captaincy for the next 10 years IMO

Was that the offical statement?

but maybe not neccessary what happens in reality.

A few teams in the NHL have changed their captain every month during a season but i've never heard of a top sports team change their captain every game.

O'Loughlin, Bailey, Leuluai, Deacon and Riddell.

No need to burden him yet imo.

He'll be Wigan captain one day though without question imo.

Glad Coley is in. I really feel something like this could kick him on a level.

They're the 5 I probably would have picked tbh with my only close choice being between Leuluai and Gleeson.

I see Captain material in joel. theres abit of the farrell in this lad hes always one of if not first to get stuck in and help his team mates.. i like that in a captain

I highly doubt it's "just a way of not demoting O'Loughlin from the captaincy role fully".

MM and SW are all about a tough culture etc. if they'd wanted to remove O'Loughlin from the captaincy and appoint someone else I'm sure they would have done without needing to tip-toe around.

From reading this thread I haven't seen much mentioned about the fact this was something which was discussed between MM and O'Loughlin. O'Loughlin likes the idea and if the players buy into it then I can't see what harm it can do.

It'll ease the pressure off of O'Loughlin and will encourage the other four selected to up their games when named as a captain for that game. The role of the captain is to convey the gameplan and ideas of the coach on the field and whilst the players might have differing styles in conveying this message, they should all be pulling in the same direction, which is the coach's direction.

IMO it won't cause any problems and if the correct players are selected it strengthens the presence of the Wigan ethos on the field.

I think people overate the amount of impact a captain can have really and people also forget that most of their influence will be every day. Therefore, surely having more than 1 captain can only be a good thing, as long as there is a 'go to man' on the field. This will probably still be Lockers. I'm pretty sure he will still lead the team out.

It had to end sometime.

Congratulations on being the one who's called it - three weeks before the first match of the season.

People on here really do talk sh*te. How the hell can not knowing who your captain is be a good thing for the other players or the so called leadership team? Lockers is captain on the opening day. We lose. The week after Lockers isn't captain. What effect does this have on Lockers? Granted it could see him raise his game, but it could also see him question himself and become less self confident.

Saying that - the new regime brought it in so it must be the next big thing.

I'm not sure the role of a captain is that important unless you have an Andy Farrell type leader of men. We don't have that at Wigan so this is something new. Will it work? Who knows but no harm in trying.

Course it will work. Maguire came up with it.

Congratulations on being the second one to openly panic - three weeks before we've even kicked a ball in anger.

Adam.....

Why don't you get back in your little box, pull the covers over your head, and wait patiently for the apocalyptic end to our season that you are seeing before we have even kicked a ball in a friendly, let alone in anger?

If it happens, then kudos to you for being one of the few who "knew" that MM's appointment spelled the end of Wigan RLFC.

If it doesn't, I hope that you'll be gracious enough to accept that some of his (and IFL's) ideas might have actually been good - As radical as they seem.

Until then - Take a

Like others, I think it's a way of working with what we've got. In the past, we've all seen times when on-field leadership and direction was lacking. IMO our players haven't always coped well when things don't go their way - on the scoreboard or with respect to penalties. I'm not saying these things were O'Loughlin's fault, they were persistent problems with the team.

So, perhaps it's a way of getting the senior players to step up leadership responsibilities - not just when they're acting as captain, but more importantly, the rest of time. The coach has also let the players choose so he's trying to do it in a way that promotes team-building. Or he could be trying to introduce a competitive aspect between senior players in order to settle on one captain in the long-term, but that sounds a bit like playing with fire to me.

I'm not 100% convinced, but let's see how it goes.

I'm not panicing, i'm not saying we're doomed or anything like that. I just refuse to get overly excited as a number of people are on here about the new setup. It's like I said about Sam last year. At the moment MM and SW could say that we've been playing cludeo in training and some on here would hail it as brilliant.

Let's be honest. We are taking a massive risk in appointing an in-experienced team that could blow up in our face, then again it could be a stroke of genius. Time will tell but as I say i'm refusing to get excited until we see what happens.

Read the post again. I'm saying if it goes wrong that will happen, not that it's already happened.

really? Well I hear they play monopoly regularly in Australia so perhaps he's just easing them in to the new techniques



Back on topic I don't think it really matters to be honest. Can't really see how anyone can get worked up about it one way or the other. May show signs of indecisiveness but don't think it will have a major impact on the field and nor should it.