I don't in any way contest the notion that the journeys in question are booked for a 323, but that does not in itself mean that one is going to turn up.
For a 323 to appear on the relevant journeys:
1) 323s need to be authorised for the route (which I presume they are);
2) the crew need to be suitably trained (and I suspect that this may still be a problem).
I very seriously doubt that the diagramming department would have put a unit that isn’t cleared, nor the crew not have the appropriate traction knowledge in the first place.
323’s can definitely go to Wigan, and the service concerned definitely has a full compliment of Liverpool traincrew on it, which is why this service can be a 323.
However;
There are still drivers at Liverpool that don’t sign 323’s.
(I think it’s just unlucky, rather than intentional that’s it’s this service concerned that’s cancelled)
That can mean anything, including unavailability of a crew passed on 323s. From where were the crew sourced for the rest of the duty?
The rest of the Drivers job ran fine (Another earlier Wigan and a Warrington).
Don’t be surprised by the Rostering department putting a driver not traction competent on that job though!
Only the other week a Man Victoria conductor covering a Liverpool job from Spare had a 323 involved in the turn, Victoria don’t sign 323’s. Oops!
Unrelated but look at 5F41 yesterday ECS Preston-Warrington BQ, Liverpool driver had no route knowledge WCML Wigan-Warrington so had to go via Huyton to get to Warrington BQ, so these rostering errors or just issues with traction/route knowledge happen!