Cruncher wrote:That's one way to look at it. Another would be that he answered the question perfectly reasonably - the meat of which answer has now been outlined on this forum several times since last night.

Perhaps you should go to one of these forums and make your objections in person. It's almost impossible for those who attended to describe everything that was said on a message board.

DaveO wrote:I have always been under the impression DW would give the club the money it needed. When he owned us we were not as I understood it run as a self sufficient going concern. The revenue from all his sporting interestests went into one big pot and he fed the money out as needed.

So when a record transfer fee was required for Fielden, the money was made available. I also doubt the club had that much money sat in the bank to pay Bradford anyway.

On a much smaller scale DW was like the rich bloke who owns Man City who is currently rumoured to be offering £100M for a Brazilian player. That sort of cash is not in City's bank account but that of their owner.

Likewise I doubt Wigan had the money for Fielden readily available at the time but DW did.

Dave

wigan pie man wrote:i thought i read earlier that somebody (a mod?) had an official picture but was keeping it under wraps?

probably a wind up

Bernard Long in exile wrote:And Tuson.

Steinlager wrote:Or people summarise the major talking points and not how they were presented. We all know how the major weekly gripes would have been addressed, but its the justification and explanation behind these answers which is what makes these events worth going to.

Frankly if you are that concerned then you should have made more effort to go, obtain more detail or simply not jump to conclusions that match your opinions.

Quote:There's no contradiction in the idea at all, it was no confirmation, just a wave to satisfy the simpleton cynics who would have turned up crying about no signings.

Quote:It will be confirmed to the media at an arranged media date, besides the fact it has effectively been confirmed in national and international media for months. In many articles the Roosters confirmed he was signing for Wigan due to SC reasons (fundamentally impossible without him signing for another club).

Quote:Also Wigan have not released one image of a kit, with said new sponsor on. People merely think they have.

DaveO wrote:Frankly you are unaware of my circumstances to come out with statements like that.

In any case hardly think commenting on your opinion Wigan are going do make announcements in a certain way by pointing to them doing the opposite is jumping to conclusions.

So basically when it suits their purpose they won't stick to the policy on announcements. There's a surprise.

Which is of course nothing like the same sort of conformation/announcement you claim the club will engage in from now on. Roberts is still not a confirmed signing by the club but it suited them to wheel him out. I am sure this new announcement policy will be bent as they see fit.

I know. It was tongue in cheek hence the smiley.
Dave

Nucking Futs wrote:I was sitting (on the floor between two bins).