WWW.RLFANS.COM :: View topic

thepriestman85 wrote:I always think along of the lines of there is 'no smoke without fire'.

Ainscough has a previous history of 'attitude problems' so it’s understandable why this has been taken the way it has.

Remember as well this isn’t a press release like Sam’s was this is from word of mouth as well which makes it a lot worse.

dave1612 wrote:Just a quick piece of news really, the word is that he has set his sights on playing 15 first team games next season. If that doesn't happen, then he will be looking for a new club at the end of the 2010 season.

Rogues Gallery wrote:Sam said that he was hoping to break into the first team. Both Noble and IL said they expected him to play 10 - 15 games in the first team in 2009.

Quote:There's a BIG difference in what Ainscough is saying if it's true (which I doubt)

Shaun Wane will certainly not stand for it, he has dropped players before (and in big games) including Ainscough.

Let's see what happens.

DaveO wrote:Another one jumping to conclusions!

Someone posts that Ainscough has set his sights on playing 15 games and in the space of two posts he has become the first player not to respond to the new regime.

This is completely insane!

Dave

Cruncher wrote:Except that, from what we've read here, it isn't as simple as 'setting his sights on something'.

According to the original post, Ainscough has said that if he doesn't play at least 15 games next season, he will leave.

Read that as ambition, if you want.

I read it as a threat.

I also read it as foolishness.

The new heads of coaching both have established form for favouring youngsters and giving lads their chance. But attempting to lay down the law is hardly going to get Ainscough off on the right foot with them.

It's a pity he's done this. I've had the impression that the entire slate would be wiped clean once Maguire arrived, and that everyone would be judged on MM's own perception of their quality. Unless Ainscough has been badly misrepresented or misquoted here, it casts him in a bad light. If he has been misrepresented, he, or one of his associates, would do well to get on here double-quick and put the record straight.

Author:	JTB [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:59 am ]
Post subject:
Lets get rid now then. Honestly

Author:	Sharpy_4a [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:04 am ]
Post subject:
Give the lad a break, we dont even know if anything has been said. Think its some on here who have an attitude problem

Author:	dave1612 [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:09 am ]
Post subject:
It has been said by the player himself. However, i am not saying whether that's a bad or good thing, the lad is seeing youngsters like tomkins, eastmond, myler etc.... playing week in week out, and has that ambition for himself.

Author:	DaveO [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:13 am ]
Post subject:
thepriestman85 wrote:I always think along of the lines of there is 'no smoke without fire'. Ainscough has a previous history of 'attitude problems' so it’s understandable why this has been taken the way it has. Remember as well this isn’t a press release like Sam’s was this is from word of mouth as well which makes it a lot worse. Why would a rumour as opposed to an article that appeared in the press be worse (than quotes on the press)? Sam went public pre-2009 season in the Obbo that this was a make or break season for him. I didn't see anyone say this was a bad attitude and IMO the "previous history of attitude problems" with Ainscough are also just rumours. 2 +2 = 5 is IMO the reason it has been taken as it has. Dave

Author:	Rogues Gallery [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:13 am ]
Post subject:
Sam said that he was hoping to break into the first team. Both Noble and IL said they expected him to play 10 - 15 games in the first team in 2009. There's a BIG difference in what Ainscough is saying if it's true (which I doubt) Shaun Wane will certainly not stand for it, he has dropped players before (and in big games) including Ainscough. Let's see what happens.

WWW.RLFANS.COM https://rlfans.com/forums/

Ainscough https://rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=434042	Page 2 of 7

Author:	Steve Ella's Beard [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Ainscough
dave1612 wrote:Just a quick piece of news really, the word is that he has set his sights on playing 15 first team games next season. If that doesn't happen, then he will be looking for a new club at the end of the 2010 season. So where does this word come from?

Author:	DaveO [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:21 am ]
Post subject:
Rogues Gallery wrote:Sam said that he was hoping to break into the first team. Both Noble and IL said they expected him to play 10 - 15 games in the first team in 2009. The article in the Obbo on Sam was about this season just gone being a make or break one for him at Wigan. Those were his words and if he had not broken into the team as he has then I doubt he would have signed a five year deal. Ainscough is in the same boat as Sam was at the start of this season. If he doesn't get the games he may well conclude with Richards and Roberts on long term deals he will get better chances elsewhere and if he does that is obviously up to him but I don't think it would be indicative of a bad attitude. Realistic attitude more like. Quote:There's a BIG difference in what Ainscough is saying if it's true (which I doubt) Shaun Wane will certainly not stand for it, he has dropped players before (and in big games) including Ainscough. Let's see what happens. I am sure given he has played under Wane Ainscough is well aware he can't force his way into the side by threatening to leave which is another reason why I view these statements (if he did make them) in the way I do and not as evidence of some sort of attitude problem. Dave

Author:	Cruncher [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:25 am ]
Post subject:
DaveO wrote:Another one jumping to conclusions! Someone posts that Ainscough has set his sights on playing 15 games and in the space of two posts he has become the first player not to respond to the new regime. This is completely insane! Dave Except that, from what we've read here, it isn't as simple as 'setting his sights on something'. According to the original post, Ainscough has said that if he doesn't play at least 15 games next season, he will leave. Read that as ambition, if you want. I read it as a threat. I also read it as foolishness. The new heads of coaching both have established form for favouring youngsters and giving lads their chance. But attempting to lay down the law is hardly going to get Ainscough off on the right foot with them. It's a pity he's done this. I've had the impression that the entire slate would be wiped clean once Maguire arrived, and that everyone would be judged on MM's own perception of their quality. Unless Ainscough has been badly misrepresented or misquoted here, it casts him in a bad light. If he has been misrepresented, he, or one of his associates, would do well to get on here double-quick and put the record straight.

Author:	LondonRobster [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:28 am ]
Post subject:
I think the first things that need sorting out are his defence and ability under the high ball. Unless they have improved he wont be getting 15 games anyway!! Hope he has improved this by the way, I like the headache our new coach will have choosing 2 wingers from Roberts, Pat and Shaun. For the record I am ever hopeful Roberts is going to kick on in his second season like Pat did.

Author:	Sharpy_4a [ Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:28 am ]
Post subject:
Cruncher wrote:Except that, from what we've read here, it isn't as simple as 'setting his sights on something'. According to the original post, Ainscough has said that if he doesn't play at least 15 games next season, he will leave. Read that as ambition, if you want. I read it as a threat. I also read it as foolishness. The new heads of coaching both have established form for favouring youngsters and giving lads their chance. But attempting to lay down the law is hardly going to get Ainscough off on the right foot with them. It's a pity he's done this. I've had the impression that the entire slate would be wiped clean once Maguire arrived, and that everyone would be judged on MM's own perception of their quality. Unless Ainscough has been badly misrepresented or misquoted here, it casts him in a bad light. If he has been misrepresented, he, or one of his associates, would do well to get on here double-quick and put the record straight. We dont know if he has said this, arnt we jumping the gun here?

Page 2 of 7	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/