Hull v Wakefield.

A close contest with the result in doubt until the last minute.


















But

Dreadful quality, what a contrast to last Mondays game.

I'm sure every team can play at their best when on sky cameras making no mistakes and playing at top of their game.

Damn, close game admittedly scrappy in patches but was pretty entertaining last quarter..

We can't all be Wigan you know.

Have to say SL is at a low point at the moment.

Even at the top end, can you think of any year in the past decade with a weaker set of sides at the top than this year?

Neither Wigan nor Warrington are as strong as they were in 2010-11 and certainly not in the calibre of the Bradford, Saints or Leeds sides of old. I would fancy a Wigan team with Dallas, Radlinski, Farrell, Craig Smith, Lam etc in it to finish clear top in the current era as well.

+1 The standard is getting worse season after season.

No....but their have been some shocking scorelines this weekend. 36-52! 30-44!

That one at Widnes in particular is bad because it was 52-36 and the game had 49 errors! Their surely couldn't have been any time for any rugby to be played?

Contrast this today to Sydney Roosters v Manly in which the Roosters defended 9 (yes nine!) sets in a row from Manly.

The worry is that we found it difficult to beat Wakefield. So what does that say about us (Wigan) and the whole standard of SL. The stats from the NRL paint a very sorry image of SL.

The Superleague/Opta site has that match as having 24 errors, which isn't great but isn't 49. Also bear in mind that Leeds could and did p!ss around after half-time, and probably 12 of their 14 errors came after they were 36-0 up .

That's not arguing with the original point that the standard/intensity of the average match is lower than has been for ages.

Fair enough. The 49 came from Sky who listed it as 23-26 errors on full time yesterday.

Don't worry the NRL clubs are signing up all the SL players now so in a few years they will be as bad as us.

Except it's like a reverse of the banks buying bundled "toxic debt".

What will we be left with I wonder?

<Wigan love in mode activated>

You say that "We can't all be Wigan" now cast your mind to last Monday, how good was that performance from Wigan?

I'd say at that level, they could compete with an NRL team.

Now take Tomkins away, how many of those Wigan players were household names, in fact without googling do you think anyone outside of piedome could remember their starting 17?

No household names, just kids out of the academy from local amateur sides in the surrounding area, probably all on peanuts too.
Maybe at a guess i reckon if you took Tomkins wage out the equation i reckon the Wakefield wage bill total of yesterday would be more than Wigans last Monday.

So what does this say, Wigan are a mighty powerhouse of money throwing it at every player that looks the best in their position like the 80's-90's OR they are just well coached?

Personally if people could be bothered teaching their youth how to tackle, catch and work to structures like they do at Wigan they wouldn't actually need vast sums of money, if clubs like Wakefield and Castleford were not so short sighted then maybe the league would be in a healthier position than it is.

Look at Widnes, there is a very slow and subtle rise coming from that club and it's partly because they could see long term, and work hard with their youth.

You're right, we can't all be Wigan but maybe clubs like yours should be thinking 'maybe we should be like Wigan' rather than criticising them.

<Wigan love in mode deactivated>

Hope you're happy with yourself for making me feel so dirty.

Go and have a bath now you dirty 5lag

The Wire wool isn't working, i'm going to have have to use everything Unilever can throw at me.

I think this is what both Sky and SL want but, for me, too many stoppages for imaginary head shots, a situation not helped by Stevo constantly shouting "swinging arm". It's still by far the best sport out there but is being watered down both here and down under.

That’s what you get when the rigid salary-cap experiment fails dismally. Instead of an equalisation of quality for all, you get a dumbing down for all, and although the so called top clubs still manage better overall, standards still decline. You get what you pay for! Like it or lump it.

There is a lot of evidence from others sports (mainly football and baseball) that it is the amount of wages spent rather then transfer fees paid that determines a teams success.

The salary cap cannot work in a wider society that has no wage restraint. So we get to a situation were Wigan are the best supported team with the best youth system etc etc (in other words - doing everything right) but is not allowed by the cap to pay the GOING RATE to keep its' best players.

The market determines the going rate. In this case the market includes Union and the NRL not just Super League. Rugby League in this country is signing its' own death warrant by keeping the salary cap.

I'm afraid that although the cap was set up for some very good reasons (to have a more competetive competition), it is now failing the game in this country.

Every player in the England team in the World Cup will have been offered terms to play in the NRL or Union. Can Super League allow that to happen. Because the value of the next TV deal will probably reflect that.

Ok so - get rid of the cap and you have the problem of mediocre players getting massive salaries, bankrupting clubs in the process. However Rugby League is both remarkably resilient and sustainable in this country and can we afford to sit by and watch our best players disappear?

If the cap has to come back, then the number of overseas players has to be reduced to 3 tops. The League badly needs reducing in terms of clubs and more meaningful structures put in place for the continued development of our younger players.
As a side note, I've just been watching Wigan V Australia from 1994 and just realised how much i miss a decent international scene. A proper tour, with the touring side playing the top 3/4 Super League clubs culminating in a series against the Lions, or vice versa in Aus. If only the RFL would ditch a couple of clubs, reduce the number of fixtures and start taking the game seriously again. Well, we live in hope...

I don't see that having overseas players is an issue at all. If you can afford them then let's have them over. If you argue that English players don't get their chances due to overseas players then that contradicts the need to 'ditch clubs'.

If you have more overseas players then you can sustain 14 clubs.

The problem with "ditching clubs" is who do you ditch? You can get accused of arrogance because you assume that your own club will be ok and you couldn't care less about others. We all agree that London offer little (although personally I love the annual trip down sarf) but they have never finished bottom of Super League. So it hardly seems fair to "ditch them".

Let's just work with what we have. Abandon the cap. Try to keep our best players, attract better ones from wherever (the World Cup will show us loads of talent that we could include in our game) and make sure the product is good enough for the next TV deal to include some live games on the BBC (other than the CCup)

I agree with you but remember that doing everything right (supporters, youth system) is only one part of the market. What if the going rate was set by Koukash and Simon Moran in a salary cap free world, bidding each other up for Tomkins and Wigan's best youngsters...?

I agree, but the fact that our chairman doesn't want the cap raised muddies the waters somewhat.

In the current set up Wigan are probably the strongest BUT without a cap

you then have Wire, Leeds, Hull FC, Salford, London, Widnes, Catalan and Huddersfield with a decent bit of money behind them.

Wigan's main strength is its overall setup, youth and facilities.

The best players in RL would be retained, more youngsters encouraged to take up the sport and more talent from RU attracted leading to an overall increase in the standard of the game?

Would you accept that though if it was still detrimental to Wigan?

Say we bought Sam and Lockers, would you be happy?

That probably explains why Lenagan is quite happy with the current cap arrangement. I think he is satisfied with being a big fish in a small pond, whilst not spending a fortune of his own £££ to push the club / sport further. I can't think why else he would not want the cap raising at all.

I would expect a club of the size and reputation of Wigan to attract a chairman who would be happy to put his hand in his pocket in a similar way.