I'm going to disagree slightly here NK. I think Field has been excellent at 6. He might not be scoring as many tries himself (which is to be expected from that position as opposed to fullback) but the amount of tries he's creating is just crazy! He creates so much room for everyone else and his link up play with French in the middle is on another level to anything anyone else in Superleague has.

I like Cust a lot and he's developing really well but we're running riot at times with Field at 6. I'd be tempted to give him more time there. Smith controlling the game combined with the Field threat looks really strong to me.

Check out his pass for Miski's try yesterday. Do we score that with anyone else at 6? Or the interplay with French that was ultimately pulled back for the forward pass. No other combination gives us those options.

I don’t think French is as solid as Field is in defence, caught a couple of times yesterday was French with poor efforts.

Can’t afford those kind of slip up vs Saints.

There’s certainly two sides to it and I’m not saying he’s been poor by any stretch at 6, he is playing very well but his form at fullback was incredible and I don’t think it’s wrong to consider it his best position. It’s a bit like Sam Tomkins in his Wigan prime IMO. He would do a more than adequate job at 6 but the space the fullback role gives him and the opportunities it opens up to use his pace is invaluable. I think Jonh makes a good point about his defence as well. It was a side of his game we probably didn’t expect due to his size but he was terrific there. We won’t lose any sleep over his position though. It’s just brilliant to have the option to play him at 1 or 6 and know you have French, Cust, Tommy etc to fit in around him.

True although I would raise the question of whether his form at fullback was better than Bevan's current form there. Different, definitely, but better? They've both been fantastic there and I think Field has probably been better at 6 than French on the wing. Not that either option has been bad, of course!



We're in a great position at the moment. It's staggering to think that yesterday, if we include the non use of Bibby, we had 6 players from our start of the season first choice 17 not playing, including both halves and all 3 centres!

We're not allowed to mention injuries and playing players out of position.

To have a debate about the merits of Field or French at fullback and where to fit in Cust and Leuluai is something that just makes me smile. What a problem to have!

It’s staggering to compare that debate to last years debates of how we could possibly score 10+ points a game. There’s plenty of improvements to be made yet but we’ve come so far already.

No disciplinary issues from the game, Lees has picked up a 1 match ban for Saints, (awaits the conspiracy thread to begin on RV)

He’s done well to make it this far without a ban. His technique tackling and running the ball is pretty dodgy. To say shoulder charges are apparently banned, he’s done well to avoid too much trouble.

Funny how they finally pull him against Wigan. Typical RFL giving Wigan a chance.

With him banned and Dodd injured it’s pretty much a selection crisis. I just saw a Saints fan bemoaning their luck on Twitter, strong how tough they’re doing it and asking if they’ll ever be able to field a full strength team. When does anybody get to do that? It’s so so rare for every other side.

Not really. Its the constant changes in the backline that is killing us. Mock all you like but we had Hopoate, Percival, Hurrell, Dodd, LMS out on Saturday and then lost Makinson during the game, all of whom make the first choice 17.

Yes Catalans were missing a few too however they had six of their seven starting backs all playing, first choice front row and Whitley in the back row. All our injuries are mainly in the backs.

The annoying part about Saturday was that it was obvious Napa and McIllorum would receive bans (refer to tribunal and 3 games respectively) yet only Warrington will benefit. We don't, at least one should have been a red card and its the inconsistency that's annoying as earlier in the season, one or both would've walked.

You could argue that Wigan's changes have made you stronger. Certainly KPP replacing Thornley and Smith coming in are two examples where the replacements are better than the initial first choice players.

Wonder if they'll start with Walmsley and Paasi to try and rack up a big lead in the opening 25. I'm surprised Woolf hasn't tried it before now - when Saints used to start with Walmsley and Thompson it would be a nightmare for their opponents.

All in jest and in the spirit of Derby week. I wouldn’t say you’ve had it tough in comparison to some teams but it’s certainly been tougher than recent seasons for you and disruptive. We’ve done the Saints injury debate to death but there’s no doubt in my mind that this season has been a poor one by Saints recent standards when it comes to injury luck but you’ve still probably one of the lesser disrupted clubs (as have we).

I don’t recall the Lees incident tbh although as I said earlier, I think he’s quite sloppy with his technique sometimes. I don’t ever think he’s dirty as such but he makes so much contact with his shoulder and when shoulder charges are banned, he does well to avoid much scrutiny. Ligi Sao at Hull FC is even worse and very rarely seems to get pinned.

To be fair though Stu, we had this conversation pre season and were mocked by some for saying our depth was better than yours. I remember FTV being quite scathing about it being average replacements for average players. Well i really don't think (as you quite rightly say) that the likes of Smith and KPP have been average or that French for Field at fullback, for example, has been average player for average player. In fact we're talking some of the best players in Superleague thus far. It's hardly surprising that some are taking the opportunity to throw a few back at (some) Saints fans.

I get it mate. We are there to be shot at no doubt. We’ve definitely lost some of the at times “invincibility” we had and the chopping and changing every week has added to that. Unless we get a settled side we’ll struggle to do the 4 in a row although admittedly we are still exceptionally hard to beat.

It’s why Roby didn’t fall for Peets praise a few weeks ago when he was fawning over Saints and said Wigan are still some way behind. They aren’t far behind at all and are more than capable of winning the comp this season.

I actually feel you’ll win on Saturday too, may have too much pace for us. That’s not to say I wouldn’t be confident in a knock out game or GF with a full side but I can see us losing a close one on Saturday.

It's an absolute no-brainer not to change the spine around when we're in good form and leave things just as they are, especially for such a big game. Only point for debate here IMO is whom out of Tommy & Cust gets the bench spot. Personally (on the basis they're both fit) I'd go with Tommy. Ultimate big game player & steady head...without him we wouldn't have won the cup.

Sounds like Tommy is done for a few weeks with a calf problem but Cust may be in contention.

I think I agree - but I'll wait and see what team you put out first (and to a lesser extent, see which troops we have coming back).

I still think that with close to a fully fit squad, Saints are the best team in the league by a decent margin. I think the fact that we won the last encounter, especially in the way that we did will give you another little bit of motivation. It's real progress from a Wigan perspective though that it only takes a bad (but not horrendous) set of injuries to make us favourites, as there were times last season where it looked like we were playing different sports.

Disagree that it's a no brainer - Smith obviously is a nailed on starter now but I think you can still make a very good case for putting Field back at fullback and move French over to the wing. Harsh on Miski but it's clearly our strongest back three, and whilst Field hasn't let anyone down in the halves, it's obviously not his strongest position.

Main worry I'd have with including Cust is that he's not played since the final, but on balance I think I'd still start him if he's ready.

At times last season we were missing our entire 1-5 as well as our first choice 7. For most of the season we had a SR in the centres. Nobody gave us any sympathy so don't expect any back. Saints are now going through what every club in the league has gone through every season.

Saints have barely had an injury for 3 years and now a couple have popped up they are claiming a crisis, they still include Lomax on their injured list despite him not missing a game.

Whereas Wigan have missed Hardaker, Thornley and KPP in the backs for most of the year, Bevan French wasn’t here for the first 6 weeks of the year, played a rookie at 9 for 6 weeks (knocked them out the cup and won the final in the process) and have quietly dealt without their 2 starting half backs since the final.

I’m sure the greatest team in the super dooper league era can handle a few injuries.

I think French brings others into play better from fullback than Field, and Field brings other players into play better at 6 than he does from fullback.

Field’s best attribute at fullback is his kick return when it’s a poor one and the chase is fragmented. Doesn’t happen often with Saints that…so much so that they’ve pretty much managed to alleviate that element of his threat thus far this season when we’ve played them. As 2nd receiver I think he poses a real threat to Saints if (and it’s a big if) we can get on the front foot and roll off the back of a few quick plays.

This for me too. At the very least I'd like to take a look at this option against Saints as it matters less if we lose this one than if we lose any future game this season... although it goes without saying that I'd prefer not to lose any! I do feel the pace of Field in the halves and the elusiveness of French at the back could be more effective against them than sheer pace at the back and a lesser opportunity to use French's elusiveness from the wing and, as I say, I'd at least like to try it. Putting Cust on the bench gives us chance to shake things up if necessary whilst at the same time easing him back in after what has been a longish lay off. We also get the extra option at Hooker if needed.

Wouldn't disagree with any of that to be fair. But Cust brings more in the halves than Field does, and we are a better side with all of Cust, Field and French in the side.

It might turnout that Peet doesn't want to change the spine of a winning team, or risk bringing Cust back too quickly for a game like this, and that's fair enough if he goes down that path. My point is just that we'll probably need to be near our best to beat Saints, even with their injuries, so keeping one of our key playmakers out of the team is a big call.

The dilema that SO coaches have, the usual decision get all of the best players in the team, even if that means playing some out of their club/best position. I would like to see Cust at dummy half but that may not be the best idea coming back from a dislocation