: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:46 pm  

AJ wrote:

Whats strange is, IL came back from Aus and said no signings because there was no value / players weren't right for Wigan, yet we moved for Long, surely there couldnt be a player "less right"?

Regardless of if you like Long or not he would have been a good signing for a number of reasons. Not only is he a good player who would have kicked us around the park well but being a local lad he would have settled in almost straight away.

If it was a choice between him and Orford who was the other so called option I'd take Long 9 times out of 10!

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:50 pm  

thepriestman85 wrote:

Regardless of if you like Long or not he would have been a good signing for a number of reasons. Not only is he a good player who would have kicked us around the park well but being a local lad he would have settled in almost straight away.

If it was a choice between him and Orford who was the other so called option I'd take Long 9 times out of 10!

Big call that mate picking him over Orford.

IMO Orford is a different class and would make a barrett type impact

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:05 pm  

wigan_knight wrote:

Big call that mate picking him over Orford.

IMO Orford is a different class and would make a barrett type impact

Correct

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:07 pm  

thepriestman85 wrote:

Regardless of if you like Long or not he would have been a good signing for a number of reasons. Not only is he a good player who would have kicked us around the park well but being a local lad he would have settled in almost straight away.

If it was a choice between him and Orford who was the other so called option I'd take Long 9 times out of 10!

Long showed excactly what he can come up with in 'big' games last night. If we'd have had his experience in our 5 semi's over the past few years we'd have won at least 1 or 2 imo.

He's been shocking for Saints in the main this year and I don't think many of the Saints fans had much confidence in him producing at display like that last night but as a Wigan fan it worried me. He's done it time and again in semi's and final's and especially against Wigan. I said to my dad when he pulled off that tackle on Richards he'd kill us and it turned out that way.

I say all that i'm still not certain i'd have liked us to sign him. As i said before he's been awful this year 95% of the time and the Wigan fans would have had a real struggle taking to him and vice versa especially if his form was poor.

On balance i'm happy we didn't sign him.

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:25 pm  

Right, if every player in Superleague was out of contract as of now and every player wanted to come to Wigan which players would you sign bearing in mind we only have enough for 1 or 2 world class players or a 3 or 4 average players? Adding to our current squad with Bailey joining the backroom staff for a season.

For me I would take Morley, Brough and if there was anything left Wheeler.

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:32 pm  

post wrote:

Right, if every player in Superleague was out of contract as of now and every player wanted to come to Wigan which players would you sign bearing in mind we only have enough for 1 or 2 world class players or a 3 or 4 average players? Adding to our current squad with Bailey joining the backroom staff for a season.

For me I would take Morley, Brough and if there was anything left Wheeler.

James Graham, Ryan Hall, Kyle Eastmond, Jamie Peacock.

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:37 pm  

thepriestman85 wrote:

Regardless of if you like Long or not he would have been a good signing for a number of reasons. Not only is he a good player who would have kicked us around the park well but being a local lad he would have settled in almost straight away.

If it was a choice between him and Orford who was the other so called option I'd take Long 9 times out of 10!

I respectfully disagree.

I think there are a far longer list of reasons why we shouldn't even have made an offer if indeed we did.

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:39 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

James Graham, Ryan Hall, Kyle Eastmond, Jamie Peacock.

Not enough money for both Eastmond and Hall, which one would you pick then?

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:43 pm  

post wrote:

Not enough money for both Eastmond and Hall, which one would you pick then?

Hall as Eastmond has 'distractions'.

: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:46 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

Hall as Eastmond has 'distractions'.

I'm a bit unsure about Hall he is an athlete but he doesn't seem to be a natural rugby player if you get what I mean, he runs with the ball a but awkward like someone who has never played before.