Firstly let me just state that I think our club is in a very strong position and thanks to our youth system we should be competing at the top for several seasons to come, hopefully.

HOWEVER...

From what I gather from watching Wigan TV interviews and press releases from the fans forum it seems pretty apparent that Kris Radlinski, as director of Rugby, has the main say in contract negotiations at our club. Wane and Lenagen will obviously also have a say but it seems Radlinski is the driving force behind negotiations and getting the signatures of the players that Wane wants to sign and keep on longer deals.

With this in mind it seems pretty obvious that Radlinski is at fault for the high player turnaround we have as a club. The Scott Taylor saga confirmed this to me (we may have got a small fee but nothing like what we paid for him) and the recent chaos over the failure to get Joe Burgess to agree a deal (he should have been given one 18 months ago - not 12) means we will now allow Burgess to leave and receive not a single penny despite taking him through our youth system. The problem will also resurface this season again now Sarginson, who was superb at the end of last season, runs into the last year of his contract and his agent is now in a much better bargaining position with the club. Why didn't Radlinski offer Sarginson a contract last season? Thankfully it seems the club have now realised that the policy of offering players 2+1 year deals has backfired enormously and we're now offering much longer deals to the likes of Gildart and Sutton.

I love Rads and he was great as a player but Im not a big fan of giving ex-pros jobs for sentimental reasons and thats why Saints will struggle this season with Cunningham in charge.

Hopefully in the future we wont see any more shenanigans over contracts and Radlinski will learn from his mistakes. Lets hope we dont lose Sarginson now.

This could run for a while.

Scott Taylor signed for Wigan for two years with an option for a further year in the clubs favour after the club reputedly paid a significant fee for him, this made me post at the time that if Wigan were in the driving seat the contract would have been more than two years with the option to the club.

I was shot down in flames, it has since been proved that Taylor had the upper hand, which brings me back to the Burgess affair.
A figure of £8000 per season has been quoted as being the contract that Joe was on , this equates to £160 per week which probably brings him down on a level of someone on benefits (not always their fault).
Which makes me say that the club have been either very lax in keeping an eye on the situation or Joe has thought that he was destined for greater things from an early age.
The reason I say the latter is because it is mentioned on this site that the decision was made when Joe had only played a handful of matches.

From what I have read, Wigan started negotiations with him last year, two years before his current deal expired, that would be good practice, he was at that time a promising junior (Shaun ainscough anyone) it was obvious he had talent, but so had many other juniors, it's a big step up, but he's done well with the opportunity. However if he states he wants to leave after after his contact is up what do you do? You can't force him to sign a contract, he obviously got the nod from souths that they wanted him.

He's 20, been offered a opportunity to live the Sydney lifestyle in a job he loves, even if he only does one contract out there he's still in his mid twenties and comes home, or stays in a country with a developing economy and prospects, or stay here and have his earnings capped by a structure that hasn't changed in years, with a stagnating ecconomy everywhere but London. Put yourself in his shoes what would you do!

Negotiations will all be overseen by lawyers, thats a given... I doubt that Rads will be handling them on his own.

You forget that he made his debut and played in the first team 18 months ago. Sydney Roosters said in there press release that they took notice of him after the World Club Challenge. Contract should have ben wrapped up by then like we have done with Gildart.

Wrong again. Lawyers dont oversee any negotiations. They *may* be used to check over legality of a contract if an agent isnt intelligent enough but never heard of any instance where a lawyer is overseeing negotiations.

He scored 4 against Leigh in a friendly, they started negotiations then, he had a good game in the WCC that brought him to the attention of Sydney if you ignore the academy tour he went on before that. None of us know the truth, but ultimately he has decided that Sydney is for him, at his age I don't blame him, I also don't blame the club, again you can't force someone to sign a contract, he knew he had talent, and decided to see what offers were on the table before committing to a deal at Wigan, RL is a short and brutal carreer, players need to make the best decisions to maximise the relatively short carreer they have. Very few players make enough to set themselves up for life, so,they need to take every oportunity that the game offers for their playing carreer and beyond.

The NRL have more money to offer not to mention the higher standard of competition and lifestyle offered in Sydney. How the hell anyone can blame Kris Radlinski for Joe Burgess leaving it totally beyond me. I feel sorry for IL and Co sometimes, having to deal with fans like some of ours.

Oh, well if you say so, i MUST be wrong..

I fail to see your point.

What are you trying to argue?

I think you've got the wrong thread because this isn't a debate about whether Super League or NRL is better. In fact, I dont blame him for going to try the Sydney lifestyle and I even acknowledge that the club cant compete with Australian clubs if a players only interest is the weather. What we ARE saying on this thread though is that he's been allowed to leave for free after being taken through the academy and matured and coached by the club. You'd have to be pretty apologistic not to realise that we'd be better getting a fee for him. Thats where the club has fallen down.

I fail to see your argument. We tried to sign him 18 months before the end of his contract. He said no. He has seen his current contract out and signed for another club. How can you command a fee when there is no contract? So the only way we would have got a fee would have been to sell him last season, is that what you are getting at? If so thats madness.

Right. I'm putting it out there after speaking to a good source. These are the facts.

Not long after Leigh friendly wigan began talks with Burgess.

They offered him a deal.

Not long after world club challenge sydney roosters offered him a lot more money.

Burgess went back to wigan and said if you offer inbetween what wigans first offer was and what the roosters offer is, he would of stayed. But wigan wouldn't budge. It wasn't all about money. Cause he would have stayed at Wigan for less that what roosters offered.

You are deploying 20/20 hindsight my friend. A wonderful thing. But not something Kris has at his disposal. If Wigan had announced a five year mega deal for Sarge anytime before August they would have been questioning his sanity. How on earth you can say Burgess should have been offered a new deal 18 months ago is beyond me too.

The WCC challenge cost us so much in retrospect. The Roosters would never have seen him if the game had been in Wigan and that awful documentary trashing Waneys reputation wouldn't have been made either.

In a capped salary structure who would you have got rid of to accommodate Burgess on first team wages? Pat Richards was still with us remember.

Wigan are doing their best to tie up deals for all the youngsters. The only way they do it is to cut the squad in size. However as everyone constantly argues on here we have the best depth in the comp. if we pay everyone what they are worth we'd have a squad of about 12!!!!!

You need to get yourself out of the real world, and come join us on fantasy island...

You're completely ignoring the contribution he made last year and likely this year too. Under slightly different circumstances he would have been an integral part of a grand final winning side last season, and I expect him to be a big asset this year as well. The club have done everything they can. The good thing is we will have Manfredi raring to go next season

It's easy to offer opinions after the event. Burgess is moving on, no compensation for the club, in hindsight someone messed up.

Great Gildart signed to long term deal, I watched him against Aussie juniors he looked promising, he played against Leigh and looked light weight a work in progress. He is now on a long term deal what if he turns out like Crooks or Arundel all promise and then goes off track?
Does the club still get the blame? When the tolerant fans make him the latest "scapegoat" will there be posts about who signed him to long term deal?

First of all I'm a BIG Joe Burgess fan and didn't (don't) want him to go. I would have advised him to stay at Wigan for three years and then move if he wanted, but would the offer still be there (a bird in the hand etc)

However let's look at the hard facts.

Burgess was still only 19 years of age when all this began and had two years of his contract still to run. Negotiations were ongoing from early last season when he hadn't yet established himself as a first team player. He had a fantastic season and negotiations continued.

Should Wigan have matched or got close to his Aussie offer? If I had been Lenagan / Radlinski I would have offered a lower initial contract with year by year increases over a four year period but with caveats (tries scored, games played, England games etc) They may have done this, I don't know.

What would fans be saying if he had signed a long term deal and then suffered a Kevin Penny, Shaun Ainscough Gary Wheeler, Jamie Foster type drop in form.

There is no easy solution especially as Wigan do have a wage structure that they work to. If they broke that for Burgess would the likes of Gildart, Williams, Hampshire, Sutton want similar deals. I honestly don't think there's an easy answer or one that's right or wrong.

Good luck to him I really do wish him well and am sorry he's going but it opens the door for someone else. I remember speaking to him at the end of season dinner in 2013 when he said "I want Pat Richards shirt next season"
Now go and do yourself and your family proud in Aus.

Are we really saying that a Wigan first-teamer, however young, could only be on £160 pw? That sounds incredible to me.

And, needless to say, if true, wrong, wrong, wrong!

Well if you want players to leave, that is the way to do it.

One of my first memories of a player signing for Wigan was a very young Shaun Edwards. It was all over the media back that at 17 he signed for a signing on fee of £35,000. That would be £108,000 today!

That is because Wigan recognised the schoolboy internationals talent and wanted to tie him to Wigan despite the interests of several other clubs and that is what they did. The rest is history.

Some players are special talents and warrant that kind of up front investment or higher wages. Otherwise they leave/don't sign as others are prepared to take what maybe a risk but they do stump up the cash.

If as was suggested above Burgess offered to stay for less than offered in OZ and if Wigan would not budge not because it was an unrealistic amount of money to pay to a player but just that it was more than other players of his age and experience or due to some self imposed club wage structure, then we will never sign another Shaun Edwards again if that is the attitude.

Not all players are equal and some are worth more than others and it looks like Burgess has realised his worth by going elsewhere.

Agreed, with Manfredi in reserve it would be daft to offer Burgess a massive contract, particularly as wing isn't exactly a key role either. Didn't IL say a massive problem with the previous regime was that a few players took up a huge amount of cap space? Can't blame him if this is partly a case of picking his battles so to speak

What a stupid comparison.
There was no salary cap at that time, I'm not even sure if there was freedom of contract in Rugby League.

Do you remember Daryl Lacey?

times change, salary cap and no sugar daddy

If Kris is in charge of contracts then he has a difficult job in negotiations with the agents of Charnley, Hampshire, Sarginson and Gelling. The latter two should be the easiest although I thought Gelling had signed a new two year deal not long ago.
As for Josh and Rocky then that's going to be challenging. Both are top players in their scope.
Josh is a top try scorer and Ryan one of the best of his age in the League.
To find a way through, do we have a "marquee player" catagory in the club's own pay structure?
I'd imagine Lockers would be very well paid, or should be. Bowen will be on a very tidy sum too.
Does this catagory go further down the pecking order?
There should be SC space and this was admitted ealier when Eddie suddenly departed. Surely therefore there is space in the club's own pay structure for an "adjustment" to accomodate our most talented lads.
All four players mentioned need to be retained but I'd imagine Josh and Ryan will be, or should be, the priority

Daryl is a good friend of mine and he had a lot of personal issues. He didn't get anywhere near to fulfilling his potential but there was mitigating circumstances.

But I do agree, with the salary cap in place (And so low IMO) it is hard to tie down the youngsters early

It is not a stupid comparison at all and certainly not as daft as your initial idea.

Where did I say break the salary cap? If an exceptional young player comes along and you pass because he is worth £90K a year (as determined by the market) and you won't pay it then you lose the young player. Not just any player but one of exceptional talent.

It is about ambition and more importantly[u recognition of talent[/u and [uwhat you have to pay[/u to secure it.



He was, if I recall correctly a young lad signed at about 12 years old who has since obviously vanished. What has that got to do with it? Edwards in 1983 wasn't 12 and neither is Burgess Burgess in 2015. The talent of these two was/is there to see already and is about paying the going rate for it or not.

What will you say if Hampshire follows Burgess? I see no reason to expect to hang onto him if the club won't match his value when it is within its power to do so.