Re: Hock down under : Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:30 pm  

Father Ted wrote:

Surely if a player is determined to leave then it is better to get a fee for him than not?
Wigan got a fee for Joel T and with the money bought Smith, Green and Taylor with a bit of change to spare. Joel was replaced at 3 by Goulding.
End of next year Richards is OOC as is Hansen. Both may leave or possibly one may stay. Which ever Wigan will not get a fee.
If Richards goes then either Gelling or Burgess will replace him. Should Hansen leave then the club have plenty second rowers ready for his shirt.
When Sam T goes the club will get a sizeable fee but whether they get someone as good is extremely doubtful.
Can understand why Eastmond slipped away but I do think Graham going without a fee was a big mistake. He was the best prop in SL and is the best prop in the NRL and he went for nothing.
That can't be good business surely?
This is a new style of business with today's contracts. They now appear to be no longer meant to hold a player for the full term but ring fence the club against a short term departure by being able to demand a fee.
Perhaps the next Saints player to get a long term deal will be Makinson. A quality lad who may well get tapped up by the number of British players down under to joing them out there for a better League and a far better lifestyle. If he leaves without a fee then Saints will have slipped up.

think about it like this. i'm sure every other club was celebrating when these quality players left Wigan. the players you replaced the half-backs with are in my opinion barely any better than those you could have promoted from your youth academy! Saints try to promote from within whenever possible but we look to keep our TOP QUALITY players for as long as we can, when they are not replaceable players (eastmond + graham)
not doubting Wigan's youth academy, it's equally as strong as ours, so I don't know why you don't use it more rather than signing average players like Smith and Green! (smith looked out of his depth when you signed him, not a patch on the lad Powell who played against Hull imo)

Re: Hock down under : Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:43 pm  

JonB95 wrote:

think about it like this. i'm sure every other club was celebrating when these quality players left Wigan. the players you replaced the half-backs with are in my opinion barely any better than those you could have promoted from your youth academy! Saints try to promote from within whenever possible but we look to keep our TOP QUALITY players for as long as we can, when they are not replaceable players (eastmond + graham)
not doubting Wigan's youth academy, it's equally as strong as ours, so I don't know why you don't use it more rather than signing average players like Smith and Green! (smith looked out of his depth when you signed him, not a patch on the lad Powell who played against Hull imo)

That's the most bizarre post I have read in a long time.
Last season Wigan NEVER fielded less than eight players in the team who had come through their academy and in some games there were as many as twelve.

Of the top sixteen appearance makers, eleven came through the Wigan academy system.


That was the hilarious part though.

Re: Hock down under : Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:54 pm  

We lost both half backs and have Powell in reserve. Last year he suffered a badly broken leg and only played a few games towards the end of the season. He could be going on loan to Salford so he can gain SL experience.
Wigan do promote from within.
Carmont has gone and will be replaced by Thornley or Hughes.
If Hock goes he will be replaced by either Farrell or Tuson.

The Wigan first 13 next year could look like
Tomkins,
Charnley, Goulding, Thornley/Hughes, Richards.
Green, Smith.
Prescott, McIlorum, Mossop,
Farrell/Tuson, Hansen,
O'Loughlin.
Of those I make ten out of the 13 who have come through Wigan's youth system.

The next two half backs are the U18s International 6 & 7, Hampshire and Williams. Too young yet for SL at 17/18 but it won't be too long before you see those two Wigan academy products in the first 13.

Quite good that really.

Re: Hock down under : Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:28 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

That's the most bizarre post I have read in a long time.
Last season Wigan NEVER fielded less than eight players in the team who had come through their academy and in some games there were as many as twelve.

Of the top sixteen appearance makers, eleven came through the Wigan academy system.


That was the hilarious part though.

pardon?
i never questioned your youth academy. I questioned why you need to sign the likes of Smith and Green. I don't see why you need to sell star players, if you could keep hold of them and be much stronger.

Re: Hock down under : Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:43 pm  

JonB95 wrote:

pardon?
i never questioned your youth academy. I questioned why you need to sign the likes of Smith and Green. I don't see why you need to sell star players, if you could keep hold of them and be much stronger.

It was the equally as strong as Saints part that made me smile.

When did Saints academy last win anything?

We won't pack our team with 30 plus year olds and it looks as though we have decided to promote from within rather than from overseas, as Ted has pointed out in his post above. Haven't Saints just signed three players from outside their academy including a 32 year old overseas player.

Re: Hock down under : Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:08 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

It was the equally as strong as Saints part that made me smile.

When did Saints academy last win anything?

We won't pack our team with 30 plus year olds and it looks as though we have decided to promote from within rather than from overseas, as Ted has pointed out in his post above. Haven't Saints just signed three players from outside their academy including a 32 year old overseas player.

i'm not saying I agree with our signings (except Manu, who is by all means 'above average') though I will give them every chance
as a pretty ''young'' supporter maybe I don't see where you're coming from, but our dominant side that I grew up with had a very strong core of Saints academy players, did it not? or am I wrong? either way, i'm satisfied with the players we are producing such as Lomax, Makinson, Clough etc. in the last few years.
some of Wigan's most impressive performances that I saw last season were when the side was almost packed with academy players as you stated. what happened to the lad Mellor who (a few years ago) was the next big thing at half back? I thought that he would have been preferable to Smith.

Re: Hock down under : Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:47 pm  

JonB95 wrote:

i'm not saying I agree with our signings (except Manu, who is by all means 'above average') though I will give them every chance
as a pretty ''young'' supporter maybe I don't see where you're coming from, but our dominant side that I grew up with had a very strong core of Saints academy players, did it not? or am I wrong? either way, i'm satisfied with the players we are producing such as Lomax, Makinson, Clough etc. in the last few years.
some of Wigan's most impressive performances that I saw last season were when the side was almost packed with academy players as you stated. what happened to the lad Mellor who (a few years ago) was the next big thing at half back? I thought that he would have been preferable to Smith.

In pre season 2010 Mellor sustained a major knee injury from which he never really recovered, and lost that bit of zip. I think smith will go o.k and will switch between 7 and 9 with Powell getting more game time next season.
As Ted has alluded to Hampshire and Williams are two England halfbacks who should be getting a game or two in the next two seasons (both only 17, or just turned 18)

Someone asked what could we do with the money for Hock / Tomkins if they move on.

Wigan have just signed 11 players from unbeaten U16's side (the best junior side I have ever seen, plus the Welsh U16 RU captain), that investment in talent costs a lot of money. Time will tell if that investment bears fruit.

Re: Hock down under : Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:46 am  

After watching hock on saturday; he was playing up for a move which he confirmed in the post match interview. Combining genius with out and out dirty play sucessfully is never easy and he doesn't even go close to achieving it.

He won't get away with his bully boy tactics in the NRL - they will flatten him unless he curbs it (and he does not seem capable of that).

That's up to Hock and I don't really care what he will get up to down under, what I do care is him giving away stupid spiteful penalties for England. It doesn't matter against the French as they are too poor to take advantage, but against NZ or Aus it will cost us matches. the same applies to ablett as well.

Re: Hock down under : Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:17 am  

saint at wire wrote:

After watching hock on saturday; he was playing up for a move which he confirmed in the post match interview. Combining genius with out and out dirty play sucessfully is never easy and he doesn't even go close to achieving it.

He won't get away with his bully boy tactics in the NRL - they will flatten him unless he curbs it (and he does not seem capable of that).

That's up to Hock and I don't really care what he will get up to down under, what I do care is him giving away stupid spiteful penalties for England. It doesn't matter against the French as they are too poor to take advantage, but against NZ or Aus it will cost us matches. the same applies to ablett as well.

What about the Ellis "tackle"
If that wasn't a sending off then I don't know what was and worthy of at least a two game ban. However he has been freed to play on Sunday.
That's what drives a lot of RL fans crazy, the inconsistency.

Re: Hock down under : Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:46 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Not really.
Eastmond played Saints like a kipper.
He knew he was going and then "negotiated" a one year extension, with minimal appearances.

So Saints got not a penny for him when he did move.
Wigan seem a bit more savvy.

If Hock goes then Wigan will get a fee, like they did for Joel Tomkins. The interesting one will be Sam after next years World Cup. I think he'll move on (sadly) but IL got him to sign a 5 year contract last year, so whoever wants him will have to pay a LOT of money to get him.

It's not ideal but it's better than Saints did with Eastmond and Graham.

I have said this a few times. OK saints could get a player like Ste Tyrer on a long contract and regret it. But there is nothing stopping them loaning them out if things don't turn out. Letting Players like Graham and Eastmond go on free transfers was criminal, there is no way to sugar coat it.

Back to Hock, I would be pretty miffed if I was Wigan. The club have treated him very well giving him a job while serving a ban, when many clubs would have cut and run. Then they played him for half a season with his fitness at rock bottom. When it comes to pay the club back he looks for the door. A pretty two faced thing to do in my opinion, transfer fee or no transfer fee.