Sorry soft lad. Don't have to answer or justify anything further than look at the results. The only stat that matters.

Exactly. He wasn't missed. Someone else who gets it.

Results mean nothing? Oh deary deary me.

ah name calling now.

Just defending myself pal.

Nope. It's far simpler. Was that one person missed? Answer no.

We won games without pat richards are you saying he wasn't missed?

We beat Huddersfield away with Sam and Joel. They're both useless!

Seems to me like you have some sort of personal vendetta against H. Maybe he's in on something against you with John Stape.

Cracking thread.

Of course we did. We'd not have struggled v Bradford with him in the side for example IMO. Now I can't prove that but that opinion is based on far more than your quite frankly ridiculous reasoning at the top of this thread.

I will be far more confident with Hansen and Fielden in the side going into the business end of season than without them. We have been winning games but hardly setting the world on fire and even v Quins we lost direction in the 2nd half. Hansen (and Fielden) will make that less likely to happen and you will see us win games more comfortably when he is back especially against the better sides.

Anyone who thinks we can dispense with Hansen or have not missed him because we are where are on with wiin/loss front has got their heads in the sand.

I agree with DaveO



The easiest way too look at it is this. Would have Hansen come straight back into the side on Monday.

Answer, yes, and into the starting line up.

Hansen was missed in the same way that pretty much any first team player is missed when they are out. They are in the first team because of what they offer and when they are missing then those skills go missing too unless someone can replace them.
Ignoring the Farrell/Hansen debate, it's Tuson who basically came in to replace Hansen and there is no comparison. Hansen is solid if unspectacular and defends brilliantly whilst Tuson has been poor in defence and doesn't attack well enough to make up for that either. For that reason I think Hansen has been missed.
He hasn't been missed in the same way that a key player would, such as Sam Tomkins, O'Loughlin, Hoffman or Richards but when you take Hansen out of the side there is a weakness there. Lack of size is a problem when having Farrell and Tuson in the back row but Hansen is big enough to make a difference.

I wouldnt say we've missed him since hes been injured, but that doesnt mean his value to the team is any less. It just means that the other Second Rows we have - Hoffman, Farrell, Tuson and Hughes, have been performing to the high standard we expect.

Hansons workrate is second to none in that position and as soon as he is fit to play again, he will be straight back in the team. So he doesnt do the flashy stuff that everybody notices, but he does all the hard work, he would tackle a bull if it ran at him and he makes good meters in attack.

Looking forward to his return from injury because we will be much stronger with him than without.

This is what I was going to say. We beat Huddersfield without Sam and Huddersfield have beat Warrington twice this season who are sitting top of the table.

By this logic, Sam is rubbish

what a load of e you've just spouted there you could say that about any injured player we've had missing since start of the season if you wanted put it that way , H is a solid all round player so if your saying have we not missed his avg 40 tackles a game also his awesome trys what he s scored this season your deluded

At last someone who sees the point. I've not (on this occasion discussed Hansens ability on any level) just backed up my original post-was he missed? The clear answer is no. Regardless of his ability he wasn't missed. I made a note of this after the cr@p I took for pointing out he won't be missed.

Anyway he's average at best. Many better in the SL. Wouldn't stsnd out at Wakey. Same goes for Goulding Coley and McM.

Who's John stape?
You are a petty petty petty boy.

The fact that people are disagreeing with that theory of yours rather renders your point I've quoted rather stupid doesn't it?

Hansen is a vital part of Wigan's team, and as others have pointed out, his absence has told in some of our performances of late.

Mate, you made a thread to

A. Try and show how you were right and everybody else is wrong
B. Put down one of our own players

Pretty petty if you ask me

We miss his size in defence. Farrell and Tuson are small for second rowers and that tells when they're both on the field for extended periods.

what about karl pryce??

You are right to a degree. The amount of cr@p people get in here at times is shocking, even when they have a valid point or whether it's just an opinion. So forgive me for sticking one back.

I never even mentioned the cr@p I got a few years back for suggesting Sam would be a good FB.


The rest is history.

Because we haven't lost when Hansen didn't play doesn't mean he wasn't missed. Can you be sure the team wouldn't have played better if HH had been playing? You can win a game by 2 points, or you can blow a team away by 40 points, both would be wins but the performance completely different. Surely the only way you could prove he hadn't been missed would be to prove that if he played, the performance from the team would have been equal or worse, you can't prove that, so I don't see how you can claim you are correct and everyone else is wrong? It has been suggested (and I agree) that had HH played against Crusaders we may have conceded less points due to mistakes by (I think) Tuson, so that would suggest that he was missed in that game at least?






Slightly OT but who would you sign on the same wages to replace these average at best players?