I have to say, despite the win, I thought it was a very poor decision to limit Whiting to a 25 minute cameo last night. After his performances this season - particularly the one in the last game - it seems to say to the players that it doesn't matter how well you play, you can still be dropped (or at least relegated to the bench). It seems even more ridiculous when only last week Agar was saying that Whiting would be an international footballer if he had an extra yard of pace.

Hopefully he'll be restored to the starting line up next week. I wasn't particularly impressed with either Hall or Turner last night and we're going to need some solid defence against a Wigan side looking to bounce back.

what has this poor kid to do to keep his place in our team.

Very disappointed for him to get dropped.

If i was him....I definately be lookin for another team when OOC.

Agar....grow some balls FFS.

I've already started a thread about this, but I agree totally. He's played really well this season and will only get better the more gametime he gets. Very poor decision to drop him to the bench and one that seems to confirm that his face really doesn't fit.

Any chance the threads can be merged?

Agar said that he brought Tansey back as he is seen as our long term, regular full back. He should probably consider himself very fortunate to get back last night, although it has to be said he played well.

Rich Whiting was unlucky to find himself on the bench, hopefully his recent form has cemented his place in the XVII at least.

I gathered that would be the case, but all it does is show Tansey that his place is guaranteed no matter what. If you lose your place because of a disciplinary issue and someone plays a blinder in your absence, you ought to have to earn your shirt back, IMO.

That aside, if he felt he had to bring Tansey back, Turner should have missed out. Whiting has done more than Turner to warrant a place in the starting line up, even though Turner did ok the week previously.

v

I don't think it does at all. Before Tansey's suspension he was playing very well and is our first choice full back - he serves his punishment and comes back in. Although Whiting did well last week, you've got to play your best players in their preferred positions to win matches, Tansey is a better full back than Whiting. I like Whiting and it's tough on him, but we have to play the best players that are available.

Your wish, etc....

FWIW I think there may be some danger of blowing this up out of proportion. We don't actually know what may have been said to both players, and the rest of the squad, about the whole affair. While I'd have preferred that Tansey earn his place back, I can also see that in a results-driven business you have to try and play your best team every week.

Difficult decision, and one that was going to get people disagreeing no matter which way it went.

Whiting was never going to remain as our 1st choice fullback. I agree with what Agar did (although Harsh on Whiting). He got the side back to normal as soon as possible. I think the comments he made regarding Whiting's lack of pace are right on the money, Tansey offers so much more in attack and his perfromance last night backed that up.

Plus Tansey's got a good kicking game, particularly with the absence of Long. That said, Horne's kicking game was also excellent last night.

As I said, if Tansey was going to come back in, it shouldn't have been at the expense of Whiting. Turner has done less to warrant a place in the starting line up. It's one thing to bring back a player who had been disciplined (and I see the arguments for it, FWIW), but another entirely to drop a player who has done well all season and was - by many people's estimation - MOM in the last game.

Why are people surprised by this? Agar is a second rate coach and has absolutely zero man management skills and leadership qualities. We have started well in spite of this man not because of him.

I totally agree with what you are saying here regarding Whiting it is harsh, however we have to find a (plan B) h/back partnership and yes Turner did not blow us away however he has to develop in the position, gain confidence etc and the only way this can happen is to throw him in as we will know Long will miss a fair percentage of games.

I dont see the point in dropping Turner and playing Tansey in the halfs though, as its not where he's going to play in the future. By doing what he did last night there was only one change to what would be his best side (as Long will come back in for Turner next week). I think Agar was trying to get back to his settled side asap and , IMO, this was the correct thing to do. Like I said earlier, it was harsh on Whiting, but these are the type of selection issues that we didnt have last year, so that can only be a good thing.

As always though, you're not going to please all of the people all of the time. Tough call, but correct one IMO.

Oh good. Another highly original Agar-bashing post without giving the subject any thought. Well done.

Harsh!!

So in your opinion if the ball boy coaches our team we will still get the results, that is complete and utter boll*cks

I thought it was strange to drop him to the bench, that said Whiting himself said during the week that he can't play fullback week in/out. I thought he would have got more gametime but we don't know what was said between him and Agar and I am not about to start slating Agar without knowing exactly what went on.

Long will be back next week so there will be a decision to be made as Tansey will be at fullback so the decision has to be who plays centre and who has the bench spot. Hall, Turner, Whiting and Houghton, two will miss out.

To be dropped..Turner & Houghton imo, difficult call again though, nice to have these difficult choices every week.

I'd like to see Whiting back in the centre against the Pies, I think. We'll need to be on top defensively next week and I thought we looked a little fragile at times last night.

I think for this game I might go with that, Whiting to centre and Turner off the bench. Tough on Hall but we need to be really solid next week.

We'll also need to attack well as Wigan aren't mugs defensively.

More difficult choices next week, but I'd be tempted to just replace Turner with Long from the team that played last night.

I'd like to point out that Whiting is not totally inept in attack. I point you to his defence splitting pass against Quins as evidence. I'd say he was better in attack than Hall is in defence.

I agree totally. Whiting is a couple of levels above Hall in defence and although he is no speed merchant he is a lot better in offence than he is given credit for.

And I'd disagree. For instance I'd point you to the two tries he blew in Wrexham that would have won us the game, but I don't want to turn this into a player-vs-player fight. Especially as I rate both Whiting and Hall.

I prefer the balance of the side with Hall at centre. Others will have different opinions. That's life.

The biggest weakness in our back division at the minute is the left wing defending of kicks. Both positionally in terms of kicks going behind Briscoe and high kicks where neither Briscoe nor Yeaman are very tall. It is obviously going to be tested by every opposition coach every week. If I was looking to rearrange the back division to get Whiting involved I would be looking at maybe putting Hall on the left wing and Whiting in at centre. Briscoe was good with ball in hand last night though so that would be harsh. I actually think Whiting on the bench isn't a bad option and last night showed we don't need to have Houghton on the bench. FWIW I hink Turner will be dropped for Long next week with everything else kept the same.