Alot less minutes which is probably the reason he's lagging behind.

We missed Lockers for a huge chunk of last season aswell as Hock for big parts.

Yeah he was, he won the Hitman award.

He has played less minutes this year IMO. Towards the back end of last year Lockers was injured and Bailey was mainly used in the centres, so Hansen got through a lot more work as it wasn't shared.

I havent a problem with is defence, its just his attack. If he carries on running the lines he does and with Smith playing, I'm sure it will improve Hansen's game. I can see Hansen becoming a Jones-Buchanan style of player.

Fair point.

I know SOL gets a lot of stick on here from certain quarters, but he's a giant in defence and one of the few who tries to make things happen going forward. I really rate him, better than Sinfield IMO.

Top Tackler in SL 2008, so how do you work that one out?

Doesnt wear a vee

This year's stats would suggest that happened because SOL was injured and Bailey was in the centres.

SOL has made double the number of tackles Hansen has this year. If you hadn't cut out part of my quote, you'd notice I was comparing him to SOL and Bailey.

The player gets a 'tackle' for being part of the tackle, not always that player who is making the tackle.

Hansen doesn't offer anything in defense or attack that I don't believer Bailey or Lockers can achieve.

I dont think Bailey will be here next here so surely Hansen can do his job, and he doesnt take up a quota spot?

Put Lockers in the Saints or Leeds sides and he'd be a star.

His game as been held back at times by the lack of quality around him.

He runs, tackles, kicks, passes and whacks people around the head



Prefect.

Yep, for this season I'd sooner have Bailey, can do what Hansen does and is more versatile i.e covered at centre till Gleeson arrived.

But... Hansen could be taking the place of one of the younger prospects who are looking for a chance to shine at first team level for example:

Flanny
Mossop
Tuson
Farrell

For me, at times Farrell has looked really good.

Either which way Hansen doesn't offer enough in his all round game for a place at a WINNING side.

Isn't Hansen only 23 himself?



Are those players anywhere near regular first team footy of the sort Hansen plays week in, week out? When Bailey leaves as I assume he will, Hansen would be the perfect player to bring on IF Noble had the sense to go with Hock, Lockers in 2nd row and J Tomkins at 13 when a big defensive effort was needed.

Dave

What makes Hansen the perfect player to bring on? Does he offer any impact in attack to mix up the game or trouble the other team? No. Does he offer a spark of genius to crack a defense? No. And you class this as being the 'perfect' player to bring on?

Hansen started his Wigan 1st team career in 2004, have we seen anything within his development in the last 5 years which say to us 'he is one of the best around in the SR and deserves a place in a WINNING team?' Nope, not at all.

We have several other players all looking for a chance to prove they are better in the SR, given the best of them a shot, if they prove to be better, no one will complain.

Every single player at the club needs looking at, of they don't have the potential to be a cracking player, or are already a top player, they have no place at a WINNING club. The drop of standards needs to stop.

spot on.

Farrell and Mossop will be the next two to step up but it wont be till next year at least. They both look cracking prospects as well as unlike Hansen they offer go forward.

I've said this about Hansen for a while.

There are exciting, attack minded back rowers players in our reserves but will still put the graft in when it comes to defence.

Just playing like a defensive 'work horse' and just being too comfortable in the setup will catch up with Hansen eventually. He's got more ability, but I think he's too comfortable/arrogant to break off from the rest and stand out.

I think you missed the point mate. DaveO said:

"would be the perfect player to bring on, etc, when a big defensive effort was needed"

Meaning at that stage in the game where we need to hold out, or close them into their own half then Hansen is perfect, and its not like he can't make metres either, so he isn't a liability in attack, at times last season he was showing the world how to run onto a ball (his try at millenium magic last year springs to mind)

Thank god others can see this!

For me Hansen is a big strong athletic lad, for this he can run around the field tackling players, but doesn't have a 'rugby brain'.

I also agree with the comment about a 'defensive work horse' who can also run the ball and throw his weight around.

Last season

Leeds-JJB and Ellis Both can tackle up and offer lots in attack.
Saints-Wilkin and Gilmore, both can tackle all day long and offer lots in attack.

So you can't have a player who can come on, hold the defensive line and offer ball skills, go forward, line breaks and some aggression?

I think you're missing the bigger picture.

Of course you can, you pointed out four in the previous post. We just haven't got two of them, Joel doesn't do it often enough for me, Bailey is no world beater going forwards and neither is Hansen *shrugs* if we had two Hocks it wouldn't be a problem, but we don't.

At the end of the day, we have 4 players who can play second row, two of which are identical and one is a better loose.

If you had read my post properly you would have seen the last bit which said when a big defensive effort was needed which at times in games they are. With him on instead of Hock and Lockers in the other 2nd row spot then our defence would be very sound.



I think you are talking rubbish here IMO. We all know he was top tackler last year and before anyone says it was because he assisted in tackles so many times that is nonsense. I also think people miss the fact he runs some clever lines on attack. For some reason in the space of the off season Hansen has gone from being generally praised to the latest "not good enough" figure pretty much the same as Goulding.



You can examine every player you want but with a salary cap players like Hansen and (if he wasn't probably on a high wage) Bailey do a job. The problem isn't with squad players like Hansen but with the supposed super star players like Fielden, Riddell, TL and Lockers. These are the players who aren't as good as they are cracked up to be. If they were we would have our quota of high earning super star players and players like Hansen would be appreciated for what they are, not slagged off because they are not a clone of Betts in his prime. You are barking up the wrong tree IMO.

Dave

Personally speaking, I know what we have in our reserve/academy set up and Harrison Hansen is not offering as much as some of those players. Both Liam Farrell and Lee Mossop are on course to over take him unless he brings something extra to the side.

Only from those with more opinions than sense!

Spot on, and when/if he does get overtaken then it falls to the player who has been dropped to add something to his game. Which I think he can do. Its something that happens all through sport, if your second best to a certain player then you lose your place.

Some will argue that there are reserves who offer more, but at reserve level, I very much doubt they could perform the same at SL level. Maybe next season/end of this season for Farrell, Mossop isn't far off, and this spell at Barrow could do him the world of good!

The futures bright

If anyone is talking rubbish it's you.

Firstly don't be offensive. It's great you have an opinion on what's best, but it's not ok to speak down to someone by saying something like 'you're talking rubbish' when it's someone's opinion.

I think your attitude with regards to the players and the club is what breeds a poor team, you comments about Hansen reflect this, in opposition my comments show I'm pushing for a winning team, something we are currently a million miles away from.

How does this link to Hansen? You fail to recognise 2 important factors with our current players.

1) It isn't just the poor players who are a problem (i.e Fielden) but players who simply aren't offering enough in every aspect of their game. This is why we don't have a winning team.

You heavily focus on Hansen's defensive work, but failed to recognise my earlier point that I made which was a player gets a 'tackle' for being part of the tackle, this doesn't make a tackle machine as we are lead to believe, this 'Hansen tackle machine tag' takes the attention away from the fact that he offers very little in attack, if you were building a winning team full of winners could you say Hansen is a well rounded great player? No. A tackler is all well and good, but as discussed earlier it is possible to have a tackler who can do lots in attack. Hansen does not!! We need people who offer more, this leads directly to the second point.

2) Hansen's place in the 17 means a potentially better player is missing out on the first team.

You spoke of Hansen's experience over the likes of Flanny or Farrell or Mossop, does experience always equal a better player? No. i.e Sam Tomkins, i.e Shaun Ainscough, Ainscough or Calderwood? But Calderwood has more experience so he must be better-hardly.

If Farrell etc stepped in and offered more in attack and equal in defense, who would you want in your team?

At this point we don't know if Farrell etc will offer more than Hansen, so what do we do to find out (drum role please) we play them in the first team, you never know, giving them a try might actually work!

Salary cap issues.. who's on more money do we think Hansen Flanny Farrell Mossop when he was here? Tough one to call! Hansen.

Seriously, if you want a winning team, you need to field cracking players, Hansen's had 5years to showcase his skills, bout time one of the other lads proved to the world they're better than him.

If you don't cut it, you're out. Lets be winners.

I don't watch the reserves so won't comment other than to ask if the other comments are warrantied or is it simply a case of Higham (gone), Mathers (gone), Goulding (gone) who can we stick the knife into next?

Also, can anyone comfirm that they have experienced this so called arrogance that he has? Personally, I've yet to see it and speak to him more than most on here.

If there are options worth pursuing from the lower ranks them Nobby would be remiss if he isn't checking them out. However, to say he isn't good enough because JJB, Ellis, Wilkin and Gilmour are better is a poor argument IMO.