I had not seen him play in the NRL either so when the debate raged about him being brought in to replace Higham I kept saying if he was a better player, fair enough.



I don't think it matters if he is better than Higham or not really but how good he is in his own right and if you look at it like that I don't think he is a very good player.



Put another way it makes no odds if he is better than Higham if he still isn't good enough and I don't think he is.







I do not see how you can explain away that awful pass to Tomkins feet in the Wire game or his kick late on right down the wingers throat when he had acres of space to make something as being due to him settling in. It was just poor play full stop and he has had too many games where he hasn't been good enough.



He was poor in the Wire game, we were miles better when he was off the pitch and with the season nearly over the settling in excuses are just that, excuses IMO.



Dave

Slow start but has certainly seemed to improve as the season has continued, i think he has been a very influential player of late for us.



I expect more from him next season straight from the off.



I would add our lack of options at the dummy half regards runners has blunted his ability to create.



One aspect of the game in the NRL that seems lacking in SL is the players ability to work for each other off the ball to open spaces for team mates. I think if a coach can instill this in his players the creative outlets in a team will be far more successful as will the team.

We seem to have a weakness transitioning NRL players - Craig Smith, Pat Richards to name but 2 who had a poor 1st season, then went on to impress the next.



Is it just a Wigan thing do you think?? If it is, what do other clubs do better than us to improve the process?

Pat was played out of position and therefore doesn't qualify as a crap 1st season import.

I said poor, not crap!

He was crap though.

Isn't it true though that most of our overseas recruits do not suffer a slow start? Renouf, Dallas, McCormak and Barret took weeks not months to show the form we expected. Even Gene Miles who got a lot of stick early on became breathtaking as the season progressed. That can not be said of Riddell.



You have named two there who are going back a bit in terms of when they were recruited and Richards was played out of position and looked a different player once on the wing anyway.



I tend to think its much simpler. Good players are up to speed in a matter of weeks, poor ones are not. And before everyone says "Craig Smith" the exception does not disprove the rule IMO.



Going back further did Florimo just never "settle in" or was it he just wasn't that good? Has "not settled in" become a euphemism for poor player?



Dave

Riddell had a very slow start to the season and just seemed to want to distribute the ball from dummy half and do little else but over these past couple of months i think he's been playing some pretty good stuff. He's taking the line on more and seems to have upped his workrate. I thought he was pretty quiet in his first spell on Friday but in the second spell he caused no end of problems for Wire with his running out of dummy half.



Overall i think he's been decent but there is room for improvment. I hope and think he can improve. If we suprisingly signed a halfback for nextyear leaving us with 5 halfs and hookers for 4 places i reckon that will really bring the best out of everybody(we may need a new coach if players are to be picked on form though).

Riddell could have abit of extra help back this weekend in McIlorum.



He expects to be fit for selection this weekend according to the WEP.

The weekly scapegoat award comes full circle.

Craig Smith had problems with his ankle and eventually got it sorted out and was a much better player after he went under the knife.



Pat Richards probably came into the side at the worst possible time and i dont think he was the only player to suffer under Ian Millward.



I dont think it i just Wigan though, Leeds seem to have had similar problems with some of their oversea's signings but its difficlut to know if it is because they are unsettled or are just not up to the standard required, probably a bit of both.



From what i have seen of Mark Riddell though he just doesnt look up to standard, there is no excuse for some of his passing.

Stuart Raper always maintained that most Aussies needed a season to adjust to the different style of play in SL compared to the NRL.

Barrett and Lyon didn't but it appears lesser mortals do!

IMO he's a huge improvement on the previous 9 - not that i'm knocking mickey but he was pretty limited - and he gives far less pens away!!



His passing on the whole (apart from a couple of dodgy ones this week) is far better than mickeys (and mcIllorum's for that matter who gives far too many forward passes).



I do think he needs to put himself into the game more often and ask more questions of the defence. Overall summary; getting better but still room for improvement. Needs to work on fitness.



As stated elswhere, if we worked harder off the ball it would help him and any other 9 too.



It's not his fault that our recruitment doesn't appear to have accounted for the fact that McIllorum and tommy might have a strong claim for the 9 spot too.

Mark Riddell is playing to a standard that I expect, which is good.



Then again, his game would dramatically improve if he takes the line on much more. Over a short distance he is deceptively quick and he can evade defenders when he runs at a straight angle. He is also quite hard to put down and is able to produce a good offload.



However, to do the above is energy sapping and he is also expected to distribute at every ruck, so fitness is a key attribute to be a top class hooker. With confidence of completing a full Super League season as well as a big pre-season, I think we'll see a hugely improved Mark Riddell in 2010.