^Lol at pedobear.

So we want and experienced but young, quality but cheap and skillfull and British. We dont want much.

To say Gleeson is to old at 28 is pathetic, I would understand too old if we were after Senior. We could get 4 years out of Gleeson easy, he hasn't had injury problems either (touch wood) so whats the problem apart from he likes a beer? who doesn't after a game? Anyway he has quit the ale this season.

Wow don't even try to put me in the pro Noble camp and I’m far from defending him. I’ve made my thoughts clear about Noble and how I rate his coaching and my OP was far, far from defending him or spinning this signing into something that it isn’t


The fact is IMO Gleeson will be an EXCELLENT signing and one I was calling for about a month or two back. I can’t see what you seem to have against him? As long as Pryce is given the opportunity to play along side him then I can’t see many things wrong with how or centres are potentially shaping up!

Or are you saying changing one centre for the next five/six years is a bad thing for the club?

If we can get five good seasons out of him which given he’s 28 isn’t impossible and he brings out the best in Roberts who is also here to stay then i really can't see a problem in it?

Plenty of players Lam, Barrett, Renouf, Senior, Gidley & Long all have all turned out consistently excellent performances in their 30’s and I can’t see why Gleeson can’t either?

I believe my earlier post sums up my opinion on Gleeson


In Five years time he might be working in a z... oops, He will be 34. Pedobear speaks, this is a stopgap.

Lol listen to yourself! How is a 28year old a stop gap?

As I said he is 29 in six weeks. If we can get four years out of him he will be 33 in his last season. He isn't a prop and his pace will be long gone. It isn't that long ago we used to send players on their way as they approached their 30's not sign them. It was done for a reason.

Forwards you can risk as they don't need a great deal of pace. Backs are not the same by any stretch and he probably has two years at most at his current form.

Add to that it sounds as if we are contemplating swapping him for a 22 year old where has all the indignation gone about us not developing our own young players? Or in a few years time will Goulding's name be added to the list that includes Briscoe etc as someone discusses how we mistakenly let our young players go?

Four years out of him is wishful thinking. If I am right and it's two years tops is that worth getting rid of one of our home grown players for?

Not in my book. It IS short term thinking and anyone arguing it isn't because he has four years left in the tank is deluded.

Furthermore even if we sign him now he isn't going to transform the side. The pack isn't good enough and assuming we can only address that in 2010 he will be 30 before other building blocks are in place.

Dave

This isn't a prop we are on about this is a back. 28 is far too old, and unlike Carmont he has been playing for years. He will not last very long as a good player, he is already starting to deteriorate(sp?).

Are you seriously mental? I really can't work out how you think a 28year old is past it?

My posts are a bit odd because I am refusing to take this seriously out of some hope that it isn't true. He is a poor player in a poor team, he is going to get worse from now on and we are throwing out a better younger player to accomadate him - how is this anything good?

Dave you're having a Giraffe making blanket statements like that. Both Gene Miles and Steve Renouf were older than Gleeson when we signed them (Miles by a couple of years).

No admittedly he's no Gene Miles or Steve Renouf, but even both of those were widely considered to be 'spent forces' when we signed them, and they only did 1 season each (Like some of our other great heroes back in the day).

There's no denying that Martin Gleeson has ability and experience, and if he can be brought in on the right deal (both financially and length of contract) then I'd love to see him in a Wigan shirt.

I really struggle to see where a 'young' top quality centre is going to come from, it's hard to think of a British Centre with more ability (especially to create) and any Antipodean that fits the 'young' title and has bags of ability is going to be pursuing representative honours and therefore a snowballs chance in hell of signing even for silly money.

Whilst it might be a shame for Goulding to go, if indeed he does go (it's all pure speculation at the moment), we're not in a position to consider a) What Goulding himself wants career wise, and b) who the club feels is coming through the ranks in the next couple of Seasons.

I know Goulding has maybe received some undue stick, but whilst planning for the future is one thing, it's good to have experience in the team to.

He is rapidly approaching 29 and there is no way you can expect to get five good seasons out of a back of his age who has been in the game as long as he has. I also think four years for Roberts was a mistake.



What makes you think he can? It is far from an odd opinion that backs come to the end of their careers as they hit 30. It's the normal way things are. The fact you can point to three centres who have played on effectively as older players is not the normal precedent. They are exceptions and I just can't see how we have got to the stage where we justify signing a back because he may still be able to hack it at 34 while at the same time getting rid of one who will be 26 by that time and just hitting his peak!!

Dave

Gleeson being 29 is too old yet Lockyer at 33 would be a superb signing, takes P1$s the really, there are some inteligent people on this site

Are you seriously comparing Lockyer to Gleeson?

And that's assuming he has a peak to actually hit isn't it. Jesus i'm no big fan of Noble, but I also don't train with the lad everyday so I'm in no position to Judge him and where he's likely to end up.

For all we know there could be all sorts going on behind the scenes that's keeping him out of the side or potentially moving clubs.

In an ideal world i'd like to see Goulding stay as well as Gleeson brought in, but if indeed it does happen it might simply not be possible either from the clubs finances or the player's wishes.

Please don't tell me this is happening. We are on the verge of signing one of the best centres in SL. He's also, as it happens a Wigan lad with experience at international level and SL and proven to be a success at more than one club.

We are getting this player with a trade in of Mathers, someone who had been consistently bad and Goulding, someone who time and time again hasn't be able to hold on to the chances he's been given in the first team. Look at Sam and Ainscough in comparison, both grabbed the bull by the horns and held onto their places, that is the kind of youngster we need to award to keep standards high.

Goulding has been given many chances, even the number 3 shirt to outline how much faith the club put in him.

For gods sake, enjoy the moment, at this point we've signed a top centre. be happy, for now we have something we've not had for a while, two proven top centres.

Exactly. The logic of people justifying his signing is saying he can do four!



Without relegation we are supposed to be in a position to develop young players not ship in the ready made article all the time. Goulding is not that far off being a very good player IMO and a little patience of the kind we are all prepared to give S Tomkins and Ainscough is what is required IMO.

Add to this signing Gleeson won't transform the side this season IMO because other things needs fixing and in two years I firmly believe he will not be the player he is now, I don't see what we gain over the short or long term.

Dave

You talk as if Goulding is our only young back talent and if he leaves then we’ll be letting go the only player who will be in his peak in four years time.

I think Pryce has far more potential and sadly it was getting to the stage where we potentially we had to pick one or the other as we’d struggle if both were played together. Very few young players develop at the rate they should in a team that is struggling and if we were to have both Pryce and Goulding as our two centres next season we’d be in the poop. No team will ever have nor would want to go with two 22 year old inexperienced centres as their first choice it would be suicide for not only the players but the team as well!

I’m more than happy that if Pryce continues to rip it up in the reserves when Carmont leaves he’ll be our first choice centre. Does this not appeal to you?

Pryce will stay for a god knows how many years and we can change the other centre spot every three years as Saints do –Lyon-Gidley-X

NO just the ages, if Gleason is deamed as too old at the age of 28/29 then Lockyer should n't even be thought about as a signing.

Ok then, lets just get a good three years out of him - still not a stopgap IMO.

And this is the key point, we can't exclusively look at Goulding as the only option for a developing centre. Pryce has potential, and from what i've heard Thornley to, and that's not counting other players coming through the ranks.

hey dont let facts get in the wya of opinion

That's brilliant


Oh no, rapidly approaching 29!!,

For a start we could do with players with some experience and quality. Second, 28 doesnt mean its all over for a players, otherwise on that logic some players will only get about 5 years of a career.
3rd he is a British player, Wigan infact, so you can throw out any of the "age old aussie looking for a holiday" crap that gets shouted every time.

Surely Carmont and Gidley are shining examples of quality players still at 28+..........

Gleeson can also fill in at stand off when tompkins needs a rest. Would love this signing to come off

Only fans of Wigan RL would find a way to criticise the signing of a 28 year old British international centre.

Why bother supporting the club, DaveO? Every single thing they do clearly makes you miserable. Wouldn't you be happier in your life if you stopped following the club?