: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:44 pm  

Isn't this Coley's first visit to the Willows since he signed?
If ever there was reason to perform this game would be it!!

I think he will get a 'less than favourable' reception from the nutters under the shed.

: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:46 pm  

MR FRISK wrote: hi agree with you rogues lets go through the team there is no radlinski robinson connolly miles offiah edwards gregory platt dermott mctigue betts farrell hanley Why oh why do you keep prattling on about past teams? It seems to be every bloody post you submit! Either you are a troll or a little bit simple....in fact i'd liken you to a Wigan version of Fredie. http://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... highlight= MR FRISK wrote: RADLINSKI ROBINSON CONNOLLY MOORE BELL PAUL SMITH COWIE MCCORMACK O CONNER BETTS HAUGHTON FARRELL http://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... highlight= MR FRISK wrote: how about radlinski robinson connolly moore bell paul smith cowie mccormack c conner betts haughton farrell http://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... highlight= MR FRISK wrote: we could do with these.... Paul Robinson Inga Connolly Offiah Botica Edwards Cowie Hall Skerrett Betts Mather Clarke

MR FRISK wrote: hi agree with you rogues lets go through the team there is no radlinski robinson connolly miles offiah edwards gregory platt dermott mctigue betts farrell hanley Why oh why do you keep prattling on about past teams? It seems to be every bloody post you submit! Either you are a troll or a little bit simple....in fact i'd liken you to a Wigan version of Fredie. http://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... highlight= MR FRISK wrote: RADLINSKI ROBINSON CONNOLLY MOORE BELL PAUL SMITH COWIE MCCORMACK O CONNER BETTS HAUGHTON FARRELL http://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... highlight= MR FRISK wrote: how about radlinski robinson connolly moore bell paul smith cowie mccormack c conner betts haughton farrell http://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... highlight= MR FRISK wrote: we could do with these.... Paul Robinson Inga Connolly Offiah Botica Edwards Cowie Hall Skerrett Betts Mather Clarke

Re: rl : Thu Mar 19, 2009 4:35 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

I think you just rotate them as and when you see fit really.

It's hard to say lets do it on a regular 3 game basis because of issues with form and fitness. O'Carroll has gone really well at the start of this year but after a hard physical game against a good Leeds pack on Friday maybe now is the time to give the guy a rest. Prescott deserves a shot after his form in the reserves.

I think the long term goal has to be to get both in the 17 on a regular basis but that may be a few seasons down the track.

Can't see them both being regulars for another 2 seasons yet though and I can see where jonh (I think its him) is coming from when he says sign Petero

Can't wait to see them in 3/4 years Prescott is the ideal starting prop lets just hope he can put his injury problems behind him because I think he has massive potential. Eamon will be great off the bench IMO hopefully another Danny Nutley To think we nearly didn't give Eamon a new contract last season

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:34 pm  

in the current team i would imagine just young ainscough might get a subs bench and maybe pat would get a game or 2

: Thu Mar 19, 2009 7:43 pm  

He isn't as good as when he was at Bradford, but I wouldn't say he was past it. He will probably stay at Wigan now, but with a dramatic decrease as others have said. As for the 22 metres that must be incorrect.

: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:51 am  

He may have made more than 22 yards but he was also completely anonymous against Leeds - barely noticed any difference when he was subbed. The three Wigan forwards who stood out for me were Feka, Hock and McIlorum (sp?).

: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:52 am  

If he made these yards and that few carries there must be one of two things going on. He is injured (so why is he playing) or 2 we have purposely not used him much to carry up.

I would imagine it is almost impossible for a prop to carry this few times unless instructed to do so.

That or the figures are wrong.