Exiled Wiganer
-
Posts
10,073 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Exiled Wiganer
-
-
I hope Croft is ok. Do they sometimes stay still because they have been told to do so, medically, rather than its being a certain sign of something very worrying? Fingers crossed. It’s a good game. Salford are always very watchable (even last week was watchable, despite its inevitable one sided outcome…).
-
1
-
-
I am hoping against hope that the FC fans who were encouraged to give the game a go for the first time in a while will come back again, and that they will see the FC of round 1, rather than last night.
-
1
-
-
I was really surprised by that. We looked really good. FC were such a disappointment, with only the endless FASHination of the mullet master to provide entertainment.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:
11,100 at Wire
I only glanced at it, but it looked pretty empty to me. Though they may always count season tickets, and loads of them may already be in a casino with their new wives, both dressed as Elvis.
-
3
-
-
I think FC will win, as 1) they look far better this year, 2) we usually lose this game her (including last year when the gap between the sides should have been huge) and 3) we have more than one eye on our Vegas stag do next week: I had been eyeing up 120 to 1 for us to lose all the first 4 games, given that they were hard local derby, pre stag do, stag do and then hangover + jet lag. I am pretty sure we will come good, and they have earnt the right to have a month off and a lads’ trip.
That isn’t to take anything away from what looks like a well coached and fit FC. Cartwright could be their Maguire. Their long suffering fans deserve some joy.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Just Browny said:
Innocent until proven guilty, bit you're allowed to assume the guilt of forum members in advance. Consistent.
That did make me laugh out loud.
-
3 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:
As Featherstone have been specifically brought upI'll have a go at answering this as a Fev fan and purely from my POV as such.
I'm not against a lot of the intentions of the IMG system and I also thought there was plenty wrong with the old P & R system, not least the fact that it was very tough for promotion-seeking club to build a team from within the Championship that was anywhere near SL ready unless they had a wealthy backer and were able to operate as a full-time team.
But under the old system, Fev at least had a chance of winning promotion - they actually won the Grand Final in 2011 but were denied promotion by the old licensing method, the vacant SL spot instead going to Widnes, who finished 18 points behind them in 5th. Fev also reached the Championship final on four subsequent occasions, and although they lost all 4, it clearly shows that promotion was possible for the club under that system - the club has a very poor record in play-off games in recent years for sure, and didn't deserve to get promoted on those occasions because they didn't win one of those 4 grand finals, but the possibility was there.
That's just not the case with the IMG system, which largely ignores all the positive things that have gone on at the club over the last 15 years.
In particular, the catchment area points system just seems manifestly unfair as it randomly dishes out points regardless of merit and there is nothing a club scoring the minimum points in that area can do to improve that score, which seems to go against the ethos of IMG encouraging clubs to improve. There is years of evidence that the biggest indicator of a club's potential attendances in SL is their attendances in the Championship.
Additionally, Featherstone made huge efforts over the last ten years to improve their ground, which were widely hailed at the time and lauded in comparison to the lack of similar efforts from some SL teams. Two new stands were dismantled from Scarborough FC's ground, transported to Featherstone and re-erected by a group of volunteer fans. Additionally, the pitch, which fell some way short of full size at the time, was lengthened to be the full 100m, whilst the longstanding slope was levelled off significantly. A new indoor training facility was built at the back of the ground, along with a number of other improvements to the stadium.
None of this counted for anything under the new IMG points system though, and to understand why Featherstone fans might feel aggrieved, compare the situation to that of Championship rivals Bradford. This isn't a dig at them btw, just the system. Bradford by common consent play in a ground that is nowhere near up to what should be regarded as SL standard - the club used to admit this themsleves until fairly recently - and the pitch is well short of standard size both in length and width, the latter factor having a particular impact on games, which tend to be dour affairs because there's little room for flowing passing movements.
Yet at the end of 2023 the indicative gradings had Bradford significantly higher than Featherstone (12.02 points compared to 10.65) despite the fact that Bradford had made none of the improvements to their ground that had been done by Featherstone and despite the fact that Featherstone had finished above them in the table for eight consecutive years. I'd like to think that most people could understand why something like that wouldaggrieve Featherstone fans (and the club).
That is a superb post. I am not sure what the answer is, but, as we see one of the selected 12 drag the game through the gutter, it makes me wonder just how well this “new” system is working out.
-
6
-
1
-
-
Salford passed a test to be in SL, ahead of Toulouse, Bradford and others. This test was supposed to show the best 12 clubs, and included a financial test.
The appraisal could have had an element of judgment within it - “well, they have done well on the field, but have no cash and nobody underwriting the business, so are going to run into trouble instantly”. This result illustrates that something has gone wrong: either the test was rubbish or it wasn’t applied correctly or Salford lied. Because nothing has changed for Salford between the evaluation and now. They were always on a trajectory to doom, unless someone with deep pockets stepped in. And if they were relying on that, then the proof of funds and support should have been in place long before they were awarded a place.
I hope it works out fine for them, I really do. But I would be a lot happier to have been watching Bradford and Toulouse fielding competitive teams in front of good crowds than the debacle we saw last weekend. And astonishingly the game for once had the means to make sure that we would see the best 12 clubs, but abjectly failed to use them.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, sweaty craiq said:
I have a rough idea but am not paid to be at the front of its innovation. KR did it last year and all seem to be doing it this year - cant blame em as the advantage is huge.
Yeah, I am sure it is. Our success certainly had nothing to do with the application of talent. If you give us a forwarding address we can send our trophies across next week…
-
I was reading an article about Wigan’s jolly to Vegas, which included the statement that this would be a record crowd for a SL game. I am normally very happy to argue the case for our crowd numbers being interpreted positively, but wouldn’t it be absurd for the crowd for a warm up match to be the total number of tickets sold??
I don’t know who decides these things - perhaps they can simply count how many were there by, say, half time??
-
2 hours ago, sweaty craiq said:
I would not agree, Wigans tactics were to ensure arms got stuck, late push and when with ball to move off mark.
Results were Wigan get a roll and opponents tire.
You are absolutely right. That explains how Wigan managed to win every game they won. Truly you know the game.
-
The only interest I could muster for this game was whether it could be less than a point a minute. Looks like they won’t keep it below that, but there shouldn’t be time for a century. Very very handy indeed for Saints. It’s essentially a 3 point win for them.
-
I would have thought that paying off the debts was a commitment of such magnitude that finding the additional funds should be a piece of cake. It seems odd to go that far and no further.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, RP London said:
Out of interest what, in the end, can they do to avoid this kind of problem? Genuine questions because I'm not sure. They can phone, turn up on the doorstep, bang their fist in the table but they cannot pick the team in the end. Rowley can be told all he likes but if Salford, who actually pay his wages, don't insist he picks the best team then he can do this (which shows Salford are to blame IMHO which you also acknowledge).
There are rules about playing your strongest team and sanctions for doing it, but (and this is an assumption so please correct me if I'm wrong) they only get put in place post the event... As that is then the "crime" as it's technically not been commited yet.
I don't think lifting sanctions is a good idea until they are comfortable with the due diligence progress, lifting them reapplying IMHO would be a worse look and show a lack of good sense and leadership too. Maybe they should postpone the game but is that a great precedent to set?
I'll bash the RFL as much as anyone when it is due, they don't show leadership or organisational skills and their governance is severely lacking but I genuinely am not sure what more they could do.
We had a way to avoid this. Apply a better test of ongoing solvency for qualifying for super league (or administer the existing one competently) so that a team like Toulouse or Bradford takes the field this weekend.
-
I think this could go either way. It’s the first game, so it depends on where teams are in their physical preparation. Leigh have a terrific side, and this is a “free hit” for them. There always comes a point when a winning side simply loses its edge (see City for an extreme example), and it could strike Wigan at any time.
Great to have the greatest game back.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, back in the day said:
Or he isn’t cut out for it.
-
-
Bower has published a new piece with his predictions for the year ahead. Freely available on the Guardian website.
-
2 minutes ago, Worzel said:
Sorry, that isn't intellectually coherent. Either as a writer you have a concern for the feelings and reaction of your subject, who of course knows themself even if you don't know them, or you do not.
It is hypocritical to suggest I was negligently uncorncerned for the feelings of my subject, whilst giving yourself an amnesty from the same moral obligation. Of course you know this. The only possible explanation is that you don't really mean it, and were instead cynically weaponising the mental health of a third party to pursue an argument on the internet.
This is the standard you put forward, not mine. You fail your own test sir. Good day.
Christ, you are such a bully. What is wrong with you?
-
1
-
-
56 minutes ago, Dave T said:
This is where I disagree.
The biggest story of the off season was a minor bump on the sporting landscape. We talked about it here because we are leagueies and love an argument. But there were no defaults, no clubs going bust - whilst there was plenty to discuss in the technical aspects of this, a club being in financial difficulties with modest debts and being bought out was a minor story really.
The big issue here is that people aren't interested in creating other stories - the clubs and the governing body deserves some criticism here, but so do the journalists and media organisations. As you point out, we don't get coverage that balances this stuff out, the tone in much of the media covering RL is negative.
Bower has had three features on the Guardian site this month - two use the same format of leading with a positive before adding the 'but...' and morphing into a negative article.
1. Challenge cup romance returns but has RFL's revamp backfired...
2. Bright lights of Vegas cannot dim the dark clouds over SL
His third article is a season preview and talks about the biggest opening night crowd in the comp's history, before going into a standard club-by-club preview.
On Bower himself, I find it disappointing - he is one of the RL journos who has some credibility, if you see his name or Shaw's I always think there is something in their content. I find it a shame that they have both tended to lean far too much into the negative space that is occupied by many journos repeating the same issues and little else.
Maybe.
I follow our game very closely indeed, and consider by far the biggest story in the off season was Salford’s being awarded a licence and then immediately asking for a cash hand out. That thread has run to nearly 100 pages (and I would have added more of my own posts but for the tone of attacks on non conforming views that were all too frequent).
I would have preferred a different emphasis, but Bower stands up for our game over and over again, and so this singling him out seems harsh to me.
-
1
-
-
As someone who buys the Guardian, I think their coverage is really good over the course of the year.
As a leaguie, the biggest story of the off season was Salford being awarded a licence and then having to go begging for a handout, before being saved by a non leaguie run property business. the article was fair - my issue is that we get so little coverage (excepting the Guardian from that criticism) that we are right to be aggravated when our limited bandwidth stresses negatives.
I would go easy on Bower - we would be very very much poorer without his coverage. Oh, and as for piling onto Ash, that level of bullying has become par for the course on thread after thread.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I didn’t think it was that bad in and of itself. The happily resolved Salford debacle over shadowed the off season. Had their perilous financial state lead to Toulouse getting ready for a new season, there might have been something more positive to write about. But that didn’t happen.
What annoys me is the scarcity of coverage of our game, and so the lack of balance. Every other sport seems to have writers who spend time talking up the brilliance of the players who participate in it, and draw out their characters. If this piece was followed by one about Bevan French, another about the strides our women’s and wheelchair games are taking, another about who will take advantage of any chinks in Wigan’s armour, then it would be a perfectly reasonable piece.
-
53 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:
Smart from the council if so, brings in the funds from the land deals and removes SRD being a drain on council funds
Indeed it is from their perspective. Here is what puzzles me:
- aside from Leeds and occasionally Wigan, I haven’t seen anything to suggest any of the top 20 pro teams makes money;
- that is by no means unusual or surprising in professional sport, as the “model” tends to be that wealthy owners invest in clubs for other reasons: and why not, we have the greatest game on earth and spending money on it and your team is a lot better for lots of reasons than buying a yacht;
- here, people are assuming/stating that Salford have been bought by property developers. I have dealt with and met a number of property developers over the years, either socially or because of community buildings. I am yet to find one motivated by anything other than making money (and I am not knocking that, capitalism drives on the economy);
- everything suggests that Salford generate too little income from support and sponsorship to wash their face. So, to what extent are the new owners going to be committed to putting in new funds to keep Salford afloat? I can understand a deal being done whereby Salford council offer development profits in return for getting the rugby club off its debtors list. But, having come this far, how much further can they be expected to go?
We needed to get to today, to get to a potential tomorrow, and a debt free club able to field a competitive team in 25 is what we need, but I would feel more confident of the new owners were lifelong leaguies made good, like many of the backers of other clubs.
For 25, this is the single cloud on a sunny day for Salford and SL.
-
5
-
-
On 06/02/2025 at 20:59, WN83 said:
I think it's 20kg heavier than the start of last season, so some of that weight will likely have been put on before the end of 2024. That hopefully lessens the worry that he may lose some pace or agility. One thing that amazed me in the Samoa game at Headingley was that he suddenly didn't look a giant compared to the opposition forwards, which only highlights how big some of them Samoan lads are.
I wonder whether it is 20kg bigger than the end of last season. It would be feasible to add 20kg in an off season, with a fair chunk of it dropping off as the type of exercise changes. 20kg versus the start of last year would be an astonishing figure. Peet has done enough to justify confidence that he and his staff know what they are doing.
Sat 22nd Feb: SL: Salford Red Devils v Leeds Rhinos KO 15:00 (SS+/SL+)
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted · Edited by Exiled Wiganer
You could tell that, while enjoying breaking through and scoring the try there was a part of Bentley that regretted not having a chance to get into a fight as he did so.