Personally I'd like to approach the SL as a squad game/tournament rather than a team tournament. I would like to see the vast majority of squad, if not all getting game time throughout the course of the season with bigger names rested more frequently. Not left out due to suspension or injury or poor form, just rested more throughout the season.

We have London this week, I don't see the point of bringing Sam back against a team (no disrespect) who we should be able to beat without hime and a few other senior personal.

I'd like to see Sam, Lockers, Pat, and other key players rested against teams like Widnes, London, Salford, even Wakefield, Hull KR.

With this more of the young lads will gain valuable game time making the transition into the first team as smooth as possible, also we could prolong the career of senior players minimising the number of games they play per year.

Nowadays it's not about going full throttle and coming top, it's about having your team as fit and refreshed as possible going into the playoffs.

Save the likes of Sam for bigger games and the latter rounds of the CC.

I think a team of: (At some point in the year)

Charnley
Gelling Goulding Thornley Manfredi
Green Powell
Dudson McM Eric
Hughes Faz
Flower
------------------------
Burke Logan Tuson Crosby

Would handle the likes of London, Salford, Widnes. Resting Tomkins, Pat, Smith, Mossop, Hansen, Lockers, giving them a rest to keep refreshed and fit for more difficult games enhancing the chances of a fresher team when it comes to the playoffs.

Perhaps they should add a new rule saying that no player could play more than 20 times during the weekly rounds. That way players would be forced to rest and the youngsters that took their place would get important first-game time.

Yeah various ideas like that have been floated for a while, and I have to agree with them. I think the long-term advantages of a system like that would outweigh the costs from fans potentially being put off if top players are rested.

Should make the league closer too if squads are risky with rotation, makes injuries less important throughout a season, forces the top players to play less so they are less fatigued in representative matches, incentivises teams to develop youngsters etc...

I would like to mention Widnes away in 2012. Squad rotation is happening, how many players that weren't in last years first team and making appearances?

As for limiting games for players, why? I want to go an watch the best teams we can field, not some watered down team. What about teams with a limited depth?

I could argue that if we field a weaker side to rest them, lets do it against the top teams. May as well lose 2 points and avoid the higher intensity games with our first team so they are more rested.

IMO this is down to the flawed play off system

i pay good money to see my team win games, yes they will lose games but thats part of a competitive sport, but i want to see them win, and finish top of the league and get the recognition they deserve

what we are now seeing is a system where teams cant be bothered in certain games. Leeds have done it for the last few seasons, Tony Smith at Wire learnt that last year, they came top 2 years ago by battering everyone week in week out. Admittedly it backfired a little as they didnt win the Grand Final but he had a pretty much fit / full strength team going into the play offs

We'll soon be at a point where sides have lost about 10 games and still finished top cos no-one can be bothered turning up, but everyones fresh for the playoffs

I'd also like to mention Widnes away 2012 for different reasons, yes we lost but yet we still won the league, so the lost didn't effect our league run. However we still didn't win the SL or the CC so a lost or win at Widnes was totally irrelevant. Regardless that day we played a team which should have beaten Widnes, regardless that it didn't matter.

I disagree with an almost 'going in to lose mentality' by resting top players against strong opposition, my squad rotation proposal would still allow us to win all of our games, at times we don't need the links of Sam to win the game.
Also, I feel it would hamper youth development to put them in against the likes of Warrington just to have them smashed to pieces by a very strong outfit.

I agree with this for the most part. I too would like to see a highly competitive league where finishing top means you're the champs, or at the very least give the league leaders a direct pass to the GF.

However this isn't the case, the landscape has changed and so must the tactics in order to be perfectly prepared at the end of the season. I do believe you can go into each game looking to win without fielding your best team each time.

God forbid a time will ever come when a law is introduced that restricts clubs from fielding their best players.

But knowing the RFL, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Well, the current format suggests that it may not be best to finish top, therefore, there is not the same pressure TOO play your best players.

I'm off for the train... Wrap up warm one and all..

Dont worry to much about Wigan finishing top

its up to the coach...thats what he gets paid for.

it is, but they are more likely to rotate knowing that you win bugger all for finishing top, and that there's no real incentive for going all out for the whole season.

as i tried to say in my last post, Leeds have got it right (much as i disagree with the system) and Wire almost had it right last year after blowing up in the play offs the year before

if teams are competing for worst case a top 4 play off, would Leeds have chucked a game 2 years ago so that they didnt finish 4th? I know their fans will argue that they still had to beat X & Y etc, but to get a home game against 8th, then an away game against 4th who poss had a much tougher game the week before etc etc IMO is not right

i accept that the current system is a play off whereby winning the league means bugger all, but we are rewarding mediocrity by allowing a team who could poss lose 10 games + be called champions

can you imagine the premier league having a play off and (Liverpool or West Brom - or someone whos in 8th pos now) being called champions after United have P***ed it all season

We have no choice other than to use squad rotation if we dont send players like Crosby, Logan, Gelling, etc on Dual Reg.

Yes it did. Big time. We ended up having to bust a gut to beat HKR or face having to win the league v Saints at home. Not the kind of pressure you want to put your team under immediately before the playoffs. Points in the bag v Widnes would have meant the league would have been won earlier. Wane made a mistake by resting so many players in that game and it cost us a lot of effort at the end of the season. Did the same V Bradford at home.



It was relevant for precisely the reason I give.



As to Sam T not being played today. Thank God he was is all I can say or that could have been another Widnes type game.

And of course as a season ticket holder I expect to see him play if fit. It is what I pay my money for. Your suggestion of extensive squad rotation is just another illustration of the league doesn't mater syndrome.

IMO todays game is just another symptom of the SL play off system in its current state

Yes Wigan won, but with key players missing and without playing too well. The team lacked the intensity of the last 2 weeks and it showed on the pitch

we'd all better get used to games like this if things dont change

For what its worth the championship clubs arent happy with the 8 team play off being introduced into their comp either (speaking to my lobby gobbling uncle today) and some clubs have boycotted / decided against dual registration as they disagree with what is happening there as well

Maybe not position but the lead up to the GF playoffs were. Wigan won the league in round 26 and arguably could have won in round 25 to then give the team a two week relaxed buildup to the playoffs.

Oddly this is the exact reason that winning games matters rather than the "meaningless" thread of two weeks ago.

You can argue the ifs and buts all night long, could argue if Sam had been rested before the playoffs he would have been fit to face Leeds and then we would have had a better chance of beating Leeds. We can all talk about 'what ifs', regardless it's about having your team fit and in the right frame of mind come the playoffs. Having all your best players available and fresh.
Doesn't matter if you come first or fifth, see Leeds.

But did Leeds rest Sinfield, Burrow and Maguire?

...which is why Wakefield were the Superleague Champions in 2009 after finishing 5th!

We don't seem to have much of a squad to rotate !

Our front row is in tatters.

Some have said "well it will give our young lads a chance"

.

How old are Prescott and Mossop ?

And they want them even younger in the front row ?

How long have these pundits been watching/playing the game ?

Front rowers are usually in their late 20's or more often in their early 30's. Front rowers have to intimidate their opposites.

Isn't the point though that you didn't have to bust a gut to beat HKR or Saints because at that stage you were quaranteed a top 2 finish. Wire eased off later in the season when they still had the opportunity to finish t
op because they know it counts for little.

What is the point you are trying to make?

Are you are suggesting playing a fringe player yesterday ahead of a first choice would mean the that the team would be better rested and prepared at the end of the season? Obviously the team would have to raise their performances to support the new fringe player, learn the players ways and maybe be prepared to try and pickup points towards the end of the season that were lost at the start.

You say it doesn't matter if first of fifth, so we have to be good enough to target first or fifth as presumably the rest of the league will be doing? Your very point, would suggest that it does matter and Wigan should target fifth.

Finally as out best won't be playing, do they get paid less while the new players pickup some extra?

And if Wigan had finished 2nd would this have got a GF win? The LLS is still a reward, how happy would the fans be with no silverware last year?

Would everyone be happy with targeting the GF and losing out to get nothing?

Is this now a valid defence for a team who aren't performing? Oh, we are trying for the 5th place to get to the GF as it's a sure fire way of winning, see Leeds. That's why we had a barely above average season, it's just unlucky that we didn't win the GF and the CC.

Yes, but what was the point of winning the 'league'? You could reasonably argue that we should have said screw the hub cap and made sure our players were fit for the play-offs, which we'd already easily qualified for.