why wasn't Faz captain? he seems more of an inspirer to me

Long term he may well take over from Lockers at both LF and captain. He is seen as quiet, which Lockers used to be accused of too.

Not a word gets said by anyone behind the sticks after we concede a try. Even Lockers is more of a lead by example type captain. We don't have anyone who'll read the riot act after we concede. Tomkins used to do it. We are severely lacking senior players, and it's something that quite a few fans were concerned of in pre season, particularly when Hansen left.

was gonna say, SoL isn't a big talker on the field but he's well respected. MM to me seems to be too hot-headed to look fto as an influence.

In 2nd half when we scored Matty Smith was the vocal one behind the posts. MM stood out the back of the huddle nearest the fans and got a lot of stick

I would argue that this is what Bowen, with all of his experience, should be providing. At full back he should be organising the defence in front of him. He gives the impression of someone who concentrates only on his own performance (which is average at best). And it's not good enough to suggest that he's settling in, because Sam has never shut up over at NZW.

Absolutely.
And Collis`s ban for what looked like a pretty tame challenge on Gale.
All points to a lack of consistancy once again.

Josh Charnley looked a bit cream crackered for you yesterday. Is he carrying an injury of some sort as I thought that he'd have been more involved than he was ?

He'd have been a lot more involved if the guy playing centre had passed the ball occasionally.

I'd recommend watching the game back when it comes out on Wigan TV. Bowen is often shouting and pointing players into place, particularly close to our try line

Watching it once was enough mate.

I'll take your word on that. Maybe I've been harsh on him.

Grade C charge for McIlorum with the option of an EGP.

Great!! That's all we need with Warrington coming up! I'd bet my life he gets 2 games.

Who we are playing in the next few weeks is irrelevant. He broke Dixon's jaw so it is clear where he hit him and that it was hardly a light tap he gave him, he should get as lengthy a ban as can be given. I doubt Dixon will be back playing in two weeks time.

I'm quite happy with Logan doing 80 minutes.
The game at Wire last year he did 80 and was excellent. The game v Hull FC at our place he did 80, again was very good and I think made 48 tackles or so.
He isn't as aggresive as Micky but doesn't give pens away for foul play.
Interesting to see how he goes as MM might miss a couple or three games.

I have to say, I'm highly impressed with your guys reaction to MM's shot on Dixon - I expect fans to naturally defend their own or brush it under the carpet.

You guys seem universally aware that it was a dirty cheap shot that there is no place for in our game.

Lotta respect for that attitude.

And at no point did I try to say otherwise! Wind your neck in pal. My point was that he's gonna get banned, and with team performances of late not being great, we could do with him (one of our best players) playing against one of our rivals? What's your problem with that?

I hope Dixon makes a speedy recovery and I would never want any player to suffer injury. If the offence is proven, the ban is the right thing!

The problem with the written word is that it doesn't contain tone and inflections that you would get with someone speaking the same words. So the reader can only go off the actual words to draw their impression of meaning or intent.

Your previous post appeared IMO to be finding fault with the fact that he had been charged by the review panel rather than with the actions of McIlorum that brought about that charge. This impression was strengthened by the last sentence of that post "I'd bet my life he gets two games". This impression was also created because your post quoted (and responded to) one that stated that he had been charged. It appeared to be a post made through cherry tinted specs.

I am guessing from your reaction that that was not your point of view but that you were annoyed at McIlorum and his actions, that will likely lead to him sitting out two games rather than at the panel that had charged him.

I would be astounded if the offence isn't proven (I doubt it will get that far, I expect an EGP resulting in a 2 game ban) the maximum ban is certainly warranted.

Has anyone seen the incident on tv yet?

I don't know how anyone could form a sound judgement on it until they have. From my view 80 yards away it looked like a reckless challenge but not malicious. He got to Dixon as he got the ball and Dixon seemed to duck in to the challenge. He had a split second to react and got his timing wrong and he deserves punishing for that.

I could be entirely wrong by the way as I say, a sound judgement can't really be passed from live viewing alone.

Not a good view on the Wigan TV highlights footage...

It looked to me like he was carrying an injury of some sort as well, did not seem happy at all.

Looks like he was bent down a bit as he was hit, they must have a better angle than wigan tv as it doesnt show a lot, or is a very good angle to see the impact.

I try to be balanced in my views and like to think that whilst I'm Wigan through and through, I am big enough to appreciate that there are always 2 teams made up of mostly ordinary lads who love rugby league. You are correct that my frustration was with Micky if he did this. I wasn't at the game due to work commitments and I haven't seen the incident yet. However, there are several comments earlier in this thread suggesting that Dixon may have fallen into the challenge a little bit? The broken jaw is evidence enough of where the contact was made and the fact he's been charged tells it's own story.

MM is a great player and has matured massively in the last couple of seasons but does still let his aggression go too far. My point about Warrington was simply that I believe if we are to compete for top 4, we need our best players available for games against our top 4 rivals. I believe his probable ban would have less impact if for example we played London that week.

How you can detect malice from 80 yards away is beyond me. All I saw was MMc hit him and Dixon ending up on the floor. MMc had been going round looking to hurt someone the whole game. It's time for people to take off the cherry and white tinted glasses. I remember the furore on here last season when Cory Paterson hit Blake Green. Hanging wasn't good enough.

He was lucky not to be sent off. The ref ignored the noise from the home fans, which was credit to him, as he certainly wasn't a "homer". Although having sent Carney to the bin for a few punches that missed, I could understand the Cas fans frustration at the ref.

Mailicious or reckless is really neither here nor there. He was a danger to a fellow pro. He was miffed because we had just conceded again and looked to pin someone. He broke the guys jaw. In my book 2 games is pathetic. He should get 6.

I sincerely hope that Logan takes his chance and MMc has to work hard to get his place back. I was delighted by MMc last season, but as club skipper on the day he has let the club down badly. The club has a reputation amongst opposition fans as a bunch of head hunters and this kind of makes it difficult to argue otherwise, which annoys me because I don't see us as being any worse than anyone else.

Did you miss the bit where I said its difficult to judge without seeing replays?

I openly admitted that my judgement from 80 yards away on real time viewing may well be incorrect. On that one view it didn't look a purposeful challenge to try and hit Dixon high and he seemed to duck in to the challenge somewhat but could I hand on heart say that's how it was? Could I heck.

If it was a malicious attempt to hit the player high and considering the damage he's done he'd be lucky to get away with the 6 games you suggest.

The point is surely - no-one but the player himself can know whether it was malicious, so therefore it is an irrelevance. And as you well know, whether Dixon ducked into the challenge "somewhat" or not, is also an irrelevance. So why even mention it? Other than to excuse MMc.

I think it makes us bigger if we accept our faults (not make excuses) and work on them. MMc will have a few weeks now to consider things. I hope he comes back with a better attitude (like last season after getting a ban in the playoffs in 2012 for getting sent off in an otherwise meaninghless end of season game against Saints) and doesn't attempt to hurt anyone, thus giving away needless penalties, thus giving away field position, thus ultimately hurting his own team.