Wow. Your ego is running away with you here. Likening yourself to Wayne Bennett

(I noticed you put the disclaimers in but this does not take away from your intention).



Orford this season has been patchy if not God awful in some games. He has a tendency to come in and out of games.

Whilst comparing himself to Wayne Bennett, labelling LSOW as a 7 year old and inferring those that watch the NRL on the internet need to 'spend time with their families'.

Why commit a large portion of the salary cap to a player who is 'not the absolutely ideal solution'?

Is there such a thing as an 'absolutely ideal solution'?

How very existential. The point is that Wigan should not investing a big part of the salary cap in a player who is basically being acquired as the 'best of a bad bunch'.

I did no such thing what so ever, was simply making a highly exagerated statement to highlight the point.

As i said ealier it was both you and Last Son that claimed his form over the last 2 years has been patchy, i simply highlighted the Dally M would suggest otherwise. Do you still stand by the fact his form over the last 2 years has been patchy as i have seen you have chosen to reduce that statement to this season.

Think you also need to stop reading between the lines, i have no idea what anybodies personal circumstances are just as you do not know mine, all i said was PERSONALLY i do not have time to nor would i wish to watch more rugby than i do, my lifestle will not allow for this.

Does he even want to come to the UK? Never ever stated that he did. .'"

You need to go back and read the posts. I clearly did not wish to take this argument any further. But Jonh persisted with insults which Boris has highlighted.

I wasn't the one to get personal or offensive. You need to read through before passing such a comment.

Fight Fight Fight!!!

I equated my statement to highlight that Orford, despite winning the Dally M, had a tendency within games to be 'patchy'.



That is good for you. Ergo your judgment on NRL players is limited.

why does everyone hate jonh

he seems fairly right so far.


Anyway, for me, long is just a massive no-no! Yes he's still a decent play, probably better than most, but he's going down quickly. This added to the fact it would link him up with gleeson again, and still would take a large wage i imagine.

Added to the fact that saints have deemed him not good enough for another contract, so why should he be good enough for us?

As for orford, he's a good scrum half, not world class but not far off. But with his added leadership skills (which no-one can deny he has) i think he would make a very big impact at wigan. We still lack on-field leaders, with tim smith being one of the few i see shouting about and organising, where are we gonna be when he leaves?

Ian Lenagan has just been on the radio and stated he won't be signing either Sean Long or Matt Orford because he wants peace to break out between Last son of Wigan and Jonh

Existential?

You're the one who used the phrase 'the absolutely ideal solution'. I asked if such a player could be found anywhere. To which I suspect the answer is 'no' - given the restrictions of the salary cap.

In which case what's the point complaining about buying 'the best of a bad bunch', when the only other choice would seem to be buying someone who isn't the best of a bad bunch.

I would agree that investing a large chunk of the cap in a poor player would be ridiculous. But opinions seem to vary about Orford - some say he's poor, some say he's good. I'd also point out, that he has't been signed yet, and even if he is, we'll never know how much of the cap he's taking.

It's an interesting discussion, but there's quite a lot of hot air being blown here - and for no real reason.

EDIT: He just text me the same thing!

:anyz1twy

Has Long ever stated he wants to play for Wigan again? Has he said on many occasions he wants to finish his career at Saints? Yes. The truth is both would only sign for Wigan for financial reasons.

:anyz1twyThis have never ever been said, its come from you to back up your own point.:anyz1twy

.'"

Sean Long is hardly shy in dictating the play. If we were to sign Orford purely on reasons of leadership then it would be a foolish decison.

Boris who for you is the riskier signing and why?

and signing sean long with the disruption he could possibly bring to the team is another foolish dicision.

Then again i never said it was just for his leadership skills.

How are wigan fixed re the overseas quota? Next season teams are permitted 6 and 2011 its 5

What 'disruption' is he going to be bringing? The fact he is an ex-saints player? The players will have to lump it. One has to be cold-hearted in their recuirtment policy.

If certain players such as Bailey, Phelps and Smith leave which most likely 2 of the 3 will at least we can recruit 2 or 3.

as our other overseas, pat and feka exempt.

Orford. He will command a higher salary. No Super Duper League experience. Further Long could be on a 1 year contract with the option of a one year extension. Orford would have to be on a 2 or 3 year contract to get him to leave the NRL. Thus, if he fails to make the change to Super League, we are lumbered.

Well in that case go for Orford, Long + Gleeson + King st = big problems

Like they did with Millward?!

If you have ever met S. Long he is a love or hate him character, loved by the Saints players generally not very well liked by many of the players outside his "inner circle", players do not lump it, history has shown this. Expecting him to come into the dressing room just as Millward did and expect everything to be forgotten is a very niave view in my opinion.