Greg Ingliss for for 2 months with injury

[Saint Toppy]

2 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Nonsense . He’ll be remembered as one of the greatest players of all time . This will have zero bearing on that .  He came here when he could have stayed retired and I’m sure as a proud top level sportsman he wanted to make an impact . It’s unfortunate his body hasn’t been up to it so far but he deserves better than being rubbished 

He retired because his body wasn't up to it. If he truly believed he could restart his career he could easily have done that in the NRL, i'm sure there would have been numerous desperate clubs willing to throw money at him (Titans, Doggies).

Instead he thought he'd take the 'easy option' like so many Aussies before him, thinking SL is an easier competition and his body could cope with it. He's now finding that SL isn't the easy competition many Aussies think it is. 

[meast]

Never mind him, what about the Warrington player Greg Inglis?

[Dave T]

People are being extremely harsh on him. He has a hamstring injury. 

I find it really small time when people complain about radical signings, celebrating their failure and talking about how that money could be spent on youth players. 

Signings like this make a statement, they create excitement, media coverage, noise and while it looks like this one won't turn out well, that's RL. It happens. 

The point about him being retired for a couple of years is a bit of a red herring too, he is still only 34. 

Signings like this, SBW, Burrell and Eastmond are to be commended. I see it as like the number of RU signings in the past - loads of flops, but without them we would have missed out on absolute legends. 

[Dunbar]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

People are being extremely harsh on him. He has a hamstring injury. 

I find it really small time when people complain about radical signings, celebrating their failure and talking about how that money could be spent on youth players. 

Signings like this make a statement, they create excitement, media coverage, noise and while it looks like this one won't turn out well, that's RL. It happens. 

The point about him being retired for a couple of years is a bit of a red herring too, he is still only 34. 

Signings like this, SBW, Burrell and Eastmond are to be commended. I see it as like the number of RU signings in the past - loads of flops, but without them we would have missed out on absolute legends. 

While I understand you point, and on a case by case basis I think some of these signings are worth the investment, I think your last sentence is probably a stretch. 

These players are all in their 30's and even if they turn out to be a good signing it will only be a short term return and none would be able to achieve the 'legend' status of players coming to Rugby League or the UK in their early 20's.

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

While I understand you point, and on a case by case basis I think some of these signings are worth the investment, I think your last sentence is probably a stretch. 

These players are all in their 30's and even if they turn out to be a good signing it will only be a short term return and none would be able to achieve the 'legend' status of players coming to Rugby League or the UK in their early 20's.

It is a wider point though, if we stay insular and just spend the money on young lads from Warrington, then we will miss out on legends from Down Under and Union. 

I think sometimes there is a refusal to enjoy the ride. People still complain about signings like Sandow and Barba - but they were box office. Andrew Johns played a handful of games at Wire, but they will go down in history. SBW was a massive signing, as was Inglis. 

Cultivating a culture of big name signings signals your intent, and this can help with other signings in future. 

As a Wire fan I even remember the stick we got when we signed Adrian Morley as a 30 year old has-been, and even more glee when he broke his face on his first tackle. He is an absolute Wire legend. 

These signings are big news, I'd be sad to see us back away from them and become too risk averse again, this is entertainment, some you win, some you lose. 

[Barry Badrinath]

5 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

Why?

Came over, didn't do a proper pre season got injured in his first game, out longer than inglis. 

 

If you(the Royal you) consider inglis to be a disaster,  then using the same criteria so has field, more so even, less games and out longer. 

 

Or, can we just accept that injuries happen in rugby-league  regardless of age or status 

[Rupert Prince]

9 hours ago, Barry Badrinath said:

Indeed, jai field has also been a disaster signing

Not sure where you get that.  He is young and got an injury in his first game

Equally French has picked up a bad hamstring, and he is not a pensioner.

From Wigans point of view Tommy is still out so is Gildart so is Isa so is Marshall.  Have I missed any out?  Oh, Smithies...

 

[Barry Badrinath]

3 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Not sure where you get that.  He is young and got an injury in his first game

Equally French has picked up a bad hamstring, and he is not a pensioner.

From Wigans point of view Tommy is still out so is Gildart so is Isa so is Marshall.  Have I missed any out?  Oh, Smithies...

 

Exactly that's my point, I'm not criticising the lad at all, but all the nay sayers, who have been waiting for gi to fall flat on his face are now jumping up and down, as dave t says, he's got a hamstring strain.

 

The slant they are using on inglis could equally be used on field, unless you are(again the Royal you are) just having a pop for the sake of having a pop

[Niels]

I dont think he is as good as Stefan Rachford, we saw this when the team improved after be was injured in the Huddersfield game. 

Fullback seemed a bit of an unnecessary position to strengthen. 

[ELBOWSEYE]

1 minute ago, Niels said:

I dont think he is as good as Stefan Rachford, we saw this when the team improved after be was injured in the Huddersfield game. 

Fullback seemed a bit of an unnecessary position to strengthen. 

Yes we only had 4 options for that position before GI was signed. 

[graveyard johnny]

i doubt inglis "needed" to come here either financially or to prove himself as a player - given his past mental health issues - the covid situation- the distance from home and our gawd dam awful weather conditions since he arrived i think he should be commended for his decision to try and push himself to succeed further as a player in the game where he is already is a legend.

[gavin7094]

7 hours ago, Dave T said:

People are being extremely harsh on him. He has a hamstring injury. 

I find it really small time when people complain about radical signings, celebrating their failure and talking about how that money could be spent on youth players. 

Signings like this make a statement, they create excitement, media coverage, noise and while it looks like this one won't turn out well, that's RL. It happens. 

The point about him being retired for a couple of years is a bit of a red herring too, he is still only 34. 

Signings like this, SBW, Burrell and Eastmond are to be commended. I see it as like the number of RU signings in the past - loads of flops, but without them we would have missed out on absolute legends. 

Who were the 34vyear old rugby union signings who had retired 2 years previously that became "legends'? 

[gavin7094]

7 hours ago, Dave T said:

It is a wider point though, if we stay insular and just spend the money on young lads from Warrington, then we will miss out on legends from Down Under and Union. 

I think sometimes there is a refusal to enjoy the ride. People still complain about signings like Sandow and Barba - but they were box office. Andrew Johns played a handful of games at Wire, but they will go down in history. SBW was a massive signing, as was Inglis. 

Cultivating a culture of big name signings signals your intent, and this can help with other signings in future. 

As a Wire fan I even remember the stick we got when we signed Adrian Morley as a 30 year old has-been, and even more glee when he broke his face on his first tackle. He is an absolute Wire legend. 

These signings are big news, I'd be sad to see us back away from them and become too risk averse again, this is entertainment, some you win, some you lose. 

It is a little misleading to compare a 34 year old back who hasn't played for 2 years to a 30 year old forward who had only left his club because of an incident of foul play. Morley was signed on a 4 year contract by Wire. 

[gavin7094]

7 hours ago, Dave T said:

Signings like this make a statement, they create excitement, media coverage, noise and while it looks like this one won't turn out well, that's RL. It happens. 

The point about him being retired for a couple of years is a bit of a red herring too, he is still only 34. 

Signings like this, SBW, Burrell and Eastmond are to be commended. I see it as like the number of RU signings in the past - loads of flops, but without them we would have missed out on absolute legends. 

You and I differed on this signing at the time, as I recall.

I can not agree that signing a 33 year old back who had retired the previous year is "making a statement". 

Or, at least, it is a statement that one of England's premier clubs might not like to be associated with.

Similarly, the SBW signing was regarded as laughable by NZ RU fans that I have spoke to.  They simply couldn't believe that any club thought he was worth it.

[Dunbar]

7 hours ago, Dave T said:

It is a wider point though, if we stay insular and just spend the money on young lads from Warrington, then we will miss out on legends from Down Under and Union. 

I think sometimes there is a refusal to enjoy the ride. People still complain about signings like Sandow and Barba - but they were box office. Andrew Johns played a handful of games at Wire, but they will go down in history. SBW was a massive signing, as was Inglis. 

Cultivating a culture of big name signings signals your intent, and this can help with other signings in future. 

As a Wire fan I even remember the stick we got when we signed Adrian Morley as a 30 year old has-been, and even more glee when he broke his face on his first tackle. He is an absolute Wire legend. 

These signings are big news, I'd be sad to see us back away from them and become too risk averse again, this is entertainment, some you win, some you lose. 

I'm still not convinced.

If SBW or Inglis play at their very best (however unlikely that may be) you will get one or two seasons out of them and a decent cameo.  Morley played 170+ games for Wire. Now that was a good investment. 

As for Johns.  One of the best ever and if you are happy with 3 appearances then fine but it's not for me.

I am not arguing you shouldn't sign them, just take them for what they are.  I just don't think you can finish your first post saying you may miss out on a legend when it wouldn't be possible for these players to reach legend status for the club no matter how well they played as they are simply playing out the twilight years of their careers.

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, gavin7094 said:

Who were the 34vyear old rugby union signings who had retired 2 years previously that became "legends'? 

 

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I'm still not convinced.

If SBW or Inglis play at their very best (however unlikely that may be) you will get one or two seasons out of them and a decent cameo.  Morley played 170+ games for Wire. Now that was a good investment. 

As for Johns.  One of the best ever and if you are happy with 3 appearances then fine but it's not for me.

I am not arguing you shouldn't sign them, just take them for what they are.  I just don't think you can finish your first post saying you may miss out on a legend when it wouldn't be possible for these players to reach legend status for the club no matter how well they played as they are simply playing out the twilight years of their careers.

You have both read too much into my line about legends. My point was that when signing Union players there were many critics (because there were many flops), but we got some absolute diamonds from it. 

Sure, the Eastmond, Burrell, SBW, Inglis signings may turn out to be flops, but that's part of the fun - no guarantees, some you win, some you lose. 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I'm still not convinced.

If SBW or Inglis play at their very best (however unlikely that may be) you will get one or two seasons out of them and a decent cameo.  Morley played 170+ games for Wire. Now that was a good investment. 

As for Johns.  One of the best ever and if you are happy with 3 appearances then fine but it's not for me.

I am not arguing you shouldn't sign them, just take them for what they are.  I just don't think you can finish your first post saying you may miss out on a legend when it wouldn't be possible for these players to reach legend status for the club no matter how well they played as they are simply playing out the twilight years of their careers.

I've explained the legend point in my previous post, but I would argue that it is the critics who won't accept these signings for what they are. It is obvious signing a 34yr old retired player was a gamble, but had he had a cameo season that had paid off, he would be box office. 

My argument isn't necessarily for 34 year old signings, it is for bold outside of the box signings instead of pining for a young lad from within a 3mile radius of the stadium every time a signing is made. 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, gavin7094 said:

You and I differed on this signing at the time, as I recall.

I can not agree that signing a 33 year old back who had retired the previous year is "making a statement". 

Or, at least, it is a statement that one of England's premier clubs might not like to be associated with.

Similarly, the SBW signing was regarded as laughable by NZ RU fans that I have spoke to.  They simply couldn't believe that any club thought he was worth it.

Both of those signings absolutely made a statement. They both got more coverage than any other player in either of their two teams combined. 

That they didn't work out on the field is a slightly different point. But we shouldn't back away from bold signings because some don't work out. 

[RP London]

22 hours ago, lucky 7 said:

The folly of signing a has been from the NRL and yes he is a has been.

The wages he is being paid would have been better spent on developing youth players

I would argue that signing him will help in the development of players.. young centres and fullbacks can learn an awful lot on the training pitch from someone like Inglis. from what you hear about him he is a fantastic roll model for the players in terms of his training attitude. He could be adding a bucket load to the likes of King and Ashton, Ratchford could learn a thing or two too.. 

This is an unfortunate set back for his playing but it does not mean he is a waste of money and actually in terms of developing young players this could be a major part of their development.

[RP London]

dp

[lucky 7]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

I would argue that signing him will help in the development of players.. young centres and fullbacks can learn an awful lot on the training pitch from someone like Inglis. from what you hear about him he is a fantastic roll model for the players in terms of his training attitude. He could be adding a bucket load to the likes of King and Ashton, Ratchford could learn a thing or two too.. 

This is an unfortunate set back for his playing but it does not mean he is a waste of money and actually in terms of developing young players this could be a major part of their development.

I have heard this argument for over 40 years that all these Aussie super stars that come here would help develop British talent, sadly it's not happening, and never happened. It's over 50 years since we beat them in a test series and nearly 50 years since we won the world cup.

[Cheshire Setter]

I think people are taking the signing of Inglis far too seriously.   It came about from a chat with a friend. The money isn’t huge but the marketing opportunities are, and the risks were well known.   He still has an influence working with the younger players in training and a legend’s name gets plastered all over the merchandise.   It’s really no big deal, unless money is very tight - and at Warrington it’s much more freely available than at other clubs.

Having said that, I doubt we’ll see this sort of signing again at Warrington.

I hope he gets the chance to lace up his boots for one final appearance from the bench before he goes though, as unlikely as that is.

[Dunbar]

12 hours ago, Dave T said:

I've explained the legend point in my previous post, but I would argue that it is the critics who won't accept these signings for what they are. It is obvious signing a 34yr old retired player was a gamble, but had he had a cameo season that had paid off, he would be box office. 

My argument isn't necessarily for 34 year old signings, it is for bold outside of the box signings instead of pining for a young lad from within a 3mile radius of the stadium every time a signing is made. 

Fair enough. I was just looking to disaggregate the rationale for these signings. 

I am happy to see Inglis in Super League... a cameo from a superstar is valuable if we see it as that and use it as that.

[Eddie]

2 hours ago, lucky 7 said:

I have heard this argument for over 40 years that all these Aussie super stars that come here would help develop British talent, sadly it's not happening, and never happened. It's over 50 years since we beat them in a test series and nearly 50 years since we won the world cup.

What do you suggest then, stop signing Australians and we’ll win the World Cup? 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Fair enough. I was just looking to disaggregate the rationale for these signings. 

I am happy to see Inglis in Super League... a cameo from a superstar is valuable if we see it as that and use it as that.

I think this is exactly how it should be seen, and a 1 season deal shows that is what it was.

Similarly the Andrew Johns deal - as a Wire fan (and an RL fan) - it was one of the most exciting signings and his first game one of the most exciting games in SL history. I do think we take ourselves a touch too seriously at times, when that was just sporting showbiz gold.