Oh no, big bad Wigan paying the market value for a player at a cub that is known to have financial difficulties.

Do me a favour and go and study how markets work, because this is exactly how they work. If you have something of value, I tell you the price I'm willing to pay, you accept or you don't. If you accept it's because you feel like you are getting a good deal, and obviously I feel like I'm getting a good deal, therefore every one is happy.

You're a Warrington fan, yes?

It would explain a lot...........

the only problem you will have next week is wether you beat them by a 30 or 40 point margin

The problem I have is him moaning about us 'picking the bones' from 'lower clubs'. At least we've given some money to a 'lower club'.

Myler (Salford), Ratchford (Salford), Carvell (Hull), Solomona (Bradford), Atkins (Wakefield), Westwood (Wakefield), Bridge (Bradford)...

And I quote

I would like to point out that I don't really have a problem with Warrington doing this. They've now built a team that they can bring there young lads into gradually and they've got support from some experienced players. I do have a problem with a Warrington fan having a pop at us for doing something similar.

I have a bit of sympathy for Salford though. They've lost 3 halfbacks in as many seasons.

Is he a goal kicker by any chance?

Didn't we give money too?

I have no problem with it, ateotd Salford could have said sod off but they didn't, they're losing him end of season anyway to you and if this means they get extra money out of it, who is really losing out?

I'm not happy that ANY club can do it mid season but that's an RFL issue though not Wigans, i would like to see closed season transfers only but this is in the rules so can't complain.

not really. but i imagine he could be converted (he has kicked in the a few games)

I disagree entirely. The very nature of the game means that injuries can be frequent. If clubs weren't able to make signings mid season then they are forced to delve into their academy systems for players who possibly just aren't ready for Super League physically.

There's also the financial health of clubs to think about. If a club is in desperate need of cash they should be allowed to sell players during the season.

To be honest I have no idea if they were all at the end of their contract or not, and like I said I have no problem with it at all. The problem I have is a fan coming on here and slagging us off for something that his/her club has done.

Lets hope not.....Personally I don't think Wane is that daft....he wont want to disrupt lockers and finch before a semi final surely? Could be different if Smith could play the semi but as he can't I can't see Wane putting lockers back to 13 to disrupt the team and put him back at 6 next week.

Would expect he'll go with Matty Smith off the bench as interchange hooker this week for Logan. Thats what I'd do with Micky Mac out....gives us options and also breaks smith into the team easy, as with Micky and Tommy injured, if we don't play him there we'll have to mess about with the team when we spell logan....unless he does the full 80.

Best team we can put out for Wakey IMO is;

Sam, Goulding, Murphy, Carmont, Gelling, O'Loughlin, Finch, Mossop, Logan, Lauaki, Hock, Farrell, Tuson Bench: Smith, Thornley, Flower, Hansen

Then for Leeds

Charnley and Micky Mac are back!

It is the business end of the season, dopey to say otherwise, and you've picked the pockets of a club that need the cash and wouldn't have let him go if could have avoided it, ridiculous to deny it.

With 8 games left, I don't think so.

Because of next week and the resons already mentioned perhaps Wane is going to play Smith at 9. He's played there before and no doubt will again.
Can't see Logan starting and doing 80 mins so maybe he'll be on the bench. Smith is used to doing the 80 mins and is up to Super League pace of the game whereas Logan isn't.
So I could see Smith starting at 9.

You can't 'pick the pockets' of a club by buying a player off them. It's a complete contradiction! Salford were in need of the cash, Wigan had already agreed to sign the player for next year and Salford welcomed the opportunity to get a fee for a player they were going to lose for free anyway.
How can anyone criticise Wigan when at worst the deal is mutually beneficial and quite possibly the deal actually helps Salford far more than it helps Wigan given their money issues.

The only things that are dopey and ridiculous on this topic are the suggestions that Wigan have done something untoward.

I don't think it's a very Wiganesque signing. I personally don't think he's anywhere near Wigan standard, but I will give Wane the benefit of the doubt as he's done a great job at your club so far. Also having Sam Tomkins on the end of your passes will make you look a worldie and and add 10+ assists to your tally. If you compare him to what Richie Myler did at Salford then he look's very average, although he will have no better player to learn off than Finch.

Nothing untoward, quite understandable, but on this forum there's so much clap trap spoken about who's got the moral high ground. Here's a fine example of hypocrisy. The headline being 'Wigan panick buy to win LLS ! '
Let's all agree, we're all hypocrites !

Is it not more beneficial to Salford to get some money for a halfback rather than letting them go at the end of their contract for nothing? Particularly when they're 6 points adrift of the top 8.

I'm not. I've never moaned at Wire for buying players from clubs or letting their contracts run out to pick them up for nothing. You on the other hand...

Ooh I'm sure you have, just can't be bothered to check, because that would be equally hypocritical .

Even if this were true, which it isn't, why should Wigan concern themselves about Salford?

This is competitive sport, not a charity.

Though from what I hear, anyone actually staying at Salford may be in need of real charity in the near future.

Tit...