I'd agree with that. The only thing I'd add is that I thought Coley had a good opening spell.

I hate to say it but I wasn't impressed by Prescott at all yesterday. He seemed to plod up with the ball and sometimes even adopted Coley's sideways running style. A couple of other posters seemed impressed by his performance, but he seems a long way from his pre-injury form at the end of last season.

You do start to wonder if even our 'appreciated' forwards are weaker than we think.

Most Wigan fans would probably agree that we do okay in the back row stakes. We've got Bailey, Hock, Lockers, Hansen, Tomkins and soon hopefully Mossop all jockeying for selection. But just how effective are these lads in reality?

Even when we play what we assume to be our strongest pack, we're often bested by the opposition. It can't just be down to Fielden's ongoing frailty (though that, I'll grant you, is a huge contributor, given that his wage could probably purchase two top-line prop forwards).

Hansen was Hitman of the Year last year, and gets through a shed-load of work. Lockers tackles his guts out. Tomkins has massive promise, which he'd gradually fulfilling. Hock is the loose cannon, but can also be a wrecking ball when the mood is on him. There's only Bailey who I feel is surplus to requirements.

Yet they keep being dominated by opposing packs.

Maybe we should bite the bullet and consider that even the players we like might not be good enough for where we want Wigan to be.

I thought Bailey looked Ok v Celtic but again it was only Celtic.

It's another one of those ques5ions we won't find the answer to unless Noble makes the right selection calls or leaves.

If he would play Hock and Lockers in the 2ns row and Tomkins at 13 I think we would see a much better back row performance. I think both Lockers and Tomkins are being done no favours by Noble and both would be better players in the different positions. I think Hock would benefit as well as I think Lockers would be a more attacking 2nd row than either of Bailey or Hansen so it would not be so easy for the opposition to close our back row down.

At the moment if they gang up on Hock we don't really have another 2nd rower to trouble them. With this change I suggest I think both Lockers and Tomkins would give the opposition more pause for thought.

Dave

Isn't it funny that how in the last couple of weeks the likes of Phelps, Smith and Coley have upped their performances and they are out of contract at the end of the season

he walked the mom award, he played brilliant i just watched it again on dvd, he set up nearly every try, but i really feel sorry for the lad whatever he does will never be good enough for wigan. i say this as when smith made a tackle the wigan fans actually give an ironic cheer, exactly the same as when mathers played, just give the lads a chance

Well my opinion is Tomkins was MoM partly because he made more than one tackle compared to Smith. If you watch the game and watch Sam Tomkins tackling he puts bigger players down by good technique and does it plenty of times. It is OK to have different opinions and has nothing to do with some vendetta against Smith.

As to the "ironic" cheer I personally thought it was meant in an encouraging way but maybe I am being naive but however that cheer was intended you can't get away from the fact the reason it was made was because his defence has been poor and that is just stating a fact not having a go at him.

Dave

best game smith has had for wigan- we looked very good going out wide yesterday and smith really controlled our attack! well done smith

Smith simply isn't good enough for what we're looking for We're looking for a SL winning team. The no.7 is a key position we need a great 7 to lead us to glory.

Same situation with many of our players, simply lack one thing or another to to good enough to get into a winning team, whether it be ability or attitude.

NEW FB someone to link up in the attacking line (BRISCOE)
Roberts/Richards-take your pick.
Gleeson
Carmont
Ainscough
Tomkins
NEW 7 (ORFORD DOBSON MYLER THURSON)
NEW ENFORCER PROP (ROSS BAILEY PEACOCK MASON O MELEY PRICE CAYLESS)
Tommy
IMPACT PROP (O CARROLL MOI MOI LUKE BURGESS SAM BURGESS FERROLL)
Lockers
Hock
Tomkins
------------

Work out something with Fielden and Riddell to get them out.

BE STRICT. LETS MAKE A WINNING TEAM
Feka, NEW 9 NATHAN FRIEND, Prescott, Farrell

--------------------------------------------------
Players who aren't good enough to be in a winning team-

Hansen
Smith
Phelps
Riddell
Bailey
McClorum
----------

Smith's had a few chances. Noble only picked Sam after he was left with no choice.

IMO we only need 2 props and a top class half back

I wanna build a SL winning team, I'm very disappointed with Riddell, biggest disappointment I've had at Wigan for a long time. I want him out.

Props-Feka, Prescott, 2 new props-Ferroll from Cats and Ben Ross/O Meley/Price/etc..Aussie outstanding prop.

Riddell has shown decent signs of improvement and will keep improving. He will still not be fully settled with the combinations out on the field (it doesn't help that they change every week either) He's going to be here for a while so you might as well start supporting him because he ain't going anywhere.

Pat Amos and Ainscough will be our back 3 for a good few years and is a very good one too. We will NOT get a new full back, more chance of Phelps claiming that spot than forking out for someone.

The problem with Smith is what happens if he goes at the end of the season? We need halfbacks who are willing to stay at the club on a 3yr contract minimum (unless it's a class act like Lockyer). Chopping and changing every yr or two gives us no stability and no chance of winning anything.

You talk like you know for sure, when you don't.

When we have Roberts, Richards and Phelps who can all play full back to a good enough standard do you really think IL is going to pay unnecessary money for someone who isn't needed?

How do I or know any better?

We can both come to assumptions off what we currently have in our squad but thats about it.

And for the record, None of them can play FB properly.

It is HIGHLY unlikely that we will sign a FB, surely you can see that?

And I do apologize Mr Radlinski

I do see what you're saying. and considering the most pressing issues i.e front row.

But as I once explained this is a key area (FB) currently we don't have anyone who can play it properly.

Agree FB is an area where we don't have anyone playing it properly.
We also haven't any props playing their position properly and that's why we've only won 4 out of 11 because of the prop disaster, not the FB problem.
Although as I said we do need a good FB.

Props and a 7 are the main concern. But a true FB is an issue.

I can't but think about what a mess this season is so far.

I'm suprised at a few people questioning Smiths mom award on Sunday.

I thought he was excellent and really cut Celtic apart with a fantastic range of passing and great vision. His work for the Riddell try was outstanding as was the ball for Lockers second. His kicking game was also very good and we looked a more organised team with him in it.

The big worry with him as ever is defence but with a solid centre and second rower at the side of him he looked alot better(although he wasn't really tested).

On Sunday, for the first time in ages we looked capable of unlocking the opposition's defence at will. But my question is - did that owe to Tim Smith or to crap opposition?

I think it was a bit of both. While I agree that Tim Smith had a better game for us, I think he's still way off reclaiming his NRL title as the Most Talented Rookie, or whatever it was.

As others have said, even a half-decent outfit will target him repeatedly in the defensive line. Wakefield certainly will, as they did that on the first day and scored two tries merely by brushing him out of the way.

Sam, though physically a lot smaller, is a much stronger tackler.

I'd be very surprised if Tim Smith stayed beyond this year. Which - if Tommy continues his transformation to hooker - will surely mean that we need another half. This may even be prioritised over another prop, though if Coley goes, which he probably will, this will also become a glaring weakness in the team that the club won't be able to ignore easily.

Smith did well on Sunday in both defence and attack.

There was never any doubt about his attack in my eyes. He is an organising half back and an outstanding passer of the ball however never a 6 in a million years.

The problem is the defence and IMO Celtic where very poor going forward so he still has alot to prove.

He needs to defend against decent opposition once he does that then he can have his starting shirt back because attack-wise he is a very very useful addition to the team and him and Sam could link up well.#

Nothing against Tommy I think he is a great player and hope he stays with us beyond this season but not at scrum half.

Smith is simply so far proving not to be good enough to play in such an important position long term. I just hope IL already has his eye on a new 7.