: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:22 pm  

Conroy wrote:

Well said that man.

That's not strictly true though Conroy.

Amos makes plenty of mistakes and he's not criticised. Phelps gets an easy ride too. After a vgood game v saints I thought the old Phelps returned today. I mean had his name been Goulding and he had not passed in the first half can you imagine the uproar.

I thought Sam might have passed to Gleeson 2nd half when he made a good break.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:28 pm  

sundayroast wrote:

That's not strictly true though Conroy.

Amos makes plenty of mistakes and he's not criticised. Phelps gets an easy ride too. After a vgood game v saints I thought the old Phelps returned today. I mean had his name been Goulding and he had not passed in the first half can you imagine the uproar.

I thought Sam might have passed to Gleeson 2nd half when he made a good break.

Well he certainly does near me

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:31 pm  

Phelps did not have a perfect game today but IMO his ability to come into the line in attack looks very promising. I would like to see him get a proper run at full back as I think he could do a very good job for us.

Richards is as steady as they come but doesnt offer anything going forward IMO. As a team we have been lacking options going forward for some time and IMO Phelps could go some way to answering those questions...

Ainscough was rested today...no issue hes a young lad getting used to the physical side of Super League. When we play a top side he is going to be the first name on the team sheet as a strike rate simply cannot be ignored as it is one of the few weapons we have going forward.

I disagree totally with what Rogues is saying because mistakes or no mistakes the lad has been a revelation for us and deserves to play. He'll be back in the 13 next week - no issues.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:33 pm  

sundayroast wrote:

Rogue our club could commit murder and you would back them

You have been watching games at Orrell long enough to know that any faults displayed by Ainscough were displayed by him during those 3 years. Who has been the head coach of Wigan RLFC in those 3 years? Exactly Mr Duty Of Care. Why in 3 years did he not eradicate such faults? Why in those 3 years did he leave the boy to rot in the Academy which is even less taxing than the Reserves? Why was he not sent out on loan for a season? The only reason Ainscough even got in the reserves was after he played so well for England v Aus that Noble and co had no choice but to move him up. Where is Mr Duty Of Care in all this. What was the Duty of Care in stringing Priest along in the reserves and then dumping him. Will the same happen to JWalker?

Why did Mr Duty of Care not have season long loans arranged pre season for players? I think you have as good an idea as I do what Mr Noble was up to pre RLWC and during/after.

I will wager you this Rogues. Had Hansen been fit Joel Tomkins would not have played today. Have you not woken up to how the lad has been treated recently by Mr Noble? At the back half of last season Joel Tomkins was one of several players who got Mr Duty Of Care out of the mire.

This season Ainscough and Tomkins have both saved Mr Durty of Care's job and how does he repay them. exactly. Two boys playing out of position because as you known Ainscough is a right winger and Sam is a left sided half.

Loyalty, Meaningful is worth far more that rhetoric duty of care garbage spouted by a guy who thinks he's on a chef programme.

I always call it as I see it.

I don't believe young and Wigan produced is always best.

I watch enough of all our teams to form an opinion (which some may disagree with)

Ainscough has done some good things but made schoolboy errors, which he is far more capable of eradicating.

I was critical of some aspects of Darrell Gouldings play, maybe I expect too much.

No, I expect week on week improvement and not to make the same errors continually.

As I said Mathers and Pryce have been crucified on here for similar indiscretions.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:35 pm  

Phelps never broke a tackle though chaps? Whatsmore, he was downright greedy on more than one occasion. He's like Mathers for me. Looks keen but does not cut it.

At least with Amos you can see an element of class.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:38 pm  

sundayroast wrote:

Phelps never broke a tackle though chaps? Whatsmore, he was downright greedy on more than one occasion. He's like Mathers for me. Looks keen but does not cut it.

At least with Amos you can see an element of class.

Watch the game again. His link up play coming into the line looks very very good. I agree not the perfect game from him but he looks promising. The thing is though I dont think Noble will drop Famous Amos or Paat for him.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:38 pm  

Had Roberts/Pryce/Mathers/Phelps made the two clangers that Shaun did against Hudds then they would have been hung, drawn, quartered, castrated and fed to the pigs on here.

Shaun is undoubtedly a talent, but if Saints can bring Eastmond into the team slowly then why can't we? The backline of Phelps, Roberts and Richards did nothing wrong today and so the decision was a good one.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:40 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

snip

Maybe but Ainscoughs pro's far far outweigh his cons which is why he should be in the starting 13. I agree with giving him a week off as hes a young lad we need to look after. He'll be back in the 13 next week.

[DaveO]

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:27 am  

Conroy wrote:

Had Roberts/Pryce/Mathers/Phelps made the two clangers that Shaun did against Hudds then they would have been hung, drawn, quartered, castrated and fed to the pigs on here.

Hang on a minute. When Ainscough (and Tomkins) got their chances there were calls on here to be patient and not slag them off for mistakes. Quite right too. Those players you mention are all far more experienced than Ainscough so what would be the problem in having a go at them had they made such mistakes?

Sorry but you just don't have a worthwhile point here IMO.

If you want to talk about crucifying players as has been mentioned Goulding would have been hung out to dry had he played like Phelps today. That is a far more meaningful comparison.

Shaun is undoubtedly a talent, but if Saints can bring Eastmond into the team slowly then why can't we? The backline of Phelps, Roberts and Richards did nothing wrong today and so the decision was a good one.

Not paying Ainscough today was another Noble balls up. IMO Richards didn't look fit yet was risked. Celtic were no threat and Ainscough would have had a field day and we would have all enjoyed it. If Ainscough needs resting then it needs to be done in "the Big One" v Leeds or at Murrayfield v Saints. Games like that. That is a meaningful rest where this duty of care nonsense might gain some creditability.

The game today was made for Ainscough.

Dave

[DaveO]

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:28 am  

AJ wrote:

What he has said today in no way relates to what he said a couple of weeks ago, they are totally contradictory statements.

Fixed your typo.

Dave