Is he another hit man like Sia



He put some massive hits on the Leeds pack last night, Well done Mark

He's a tough defender. He put in few good ones against Braford aswell, i remember.

No, no, no! According to rouges he's a Wigan reject

Did not really notice him in defence in previous games. I thought he was an agressive runner of the ball and picked good lines though. Watching the replay you can see the hits much better.

Just to clear up what I actually said before he went to Australia.



So I never said he was poor but I never said he was a world beater either.

looks like aus has done him good, he looks alot taller and bigger now from when he was at wigan, carnt wait for friday after last nights result its a tough one to call, carnt wait

Looks like you might well be without Benny which is a big blow for wire.
He went for lualaki and broke waterhouses nose



Thought flanagan was excellent; he was looking for the ball all the time.

haha yeah we will but i think carvell is back so cooper will probs push into second row and carvell back at prop, weve both got two players with broken noses should be a tough encounter i carnt call it

Flanagan is looking very solid when he is on,gives us some nice competition for places in the pack and some options there to

I was pretty shocked how big he's gone, he's a big unit and find it crazy that Royce said he would fill the hooking role if robes gets injured.

Hohaia was always first call for that, as evidenced by the fact that Hohaia covered for Robes when Robes was injured.

Royce said he can play hooker a d behind the scenes it was said to be moores replacement.

Surly he would t have moved the experinced halfback he'd signed to hooker.

I only heard - or rather read - Royce once say that Flanagan can turn his hand to hooker if need be but it isn't his favoured position. I got the distinct impression from both Royce and Flanagan (via their interviews at different times) that cover for Robes would come from Hohaia and not Flanagan as Hohaia had played at hooker in either GFs or internationally, I can't remember which. It's likely that Flanagan would have only been called on to step in if both Robes and Hohaia were out injured.

I think it may have been me who said Flanagan had his best games at Wigan at hooker.

Royce stated he can play hooker when we signed him www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/14201618

Royce stated he can play hooker when we signed him www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/14201618

Quote ="brook40"Royce stated he can play hooker when we signed him www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/14201618'" Yep. I thought that was the case: Quote [i"He is tough and versatile, can play in the middle or on an edge and can cover at hooker if need be." [/i'" "If need be" - at a push in other words. I thought that's what I'd read.

Quote ="brook40"Royce stated he can play hooker when we signed him www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/14201618'" Yep. I thought that was the case: Quote [i"He is tough and versatile, can play in the middle or on an edge and can cover at hooker if need be." [/i'" "If need be" - at a push in other words. I thought that's what I'd read.

sure he has played on the wing and 6,7 and 9 when in wigans under 20's...

rogues will know more obviously

I can't recall him playing on the wing or at 7, but he has played second row and (I think) loose forward.

Isn't his favoured position 13? Dont think saints have ever filled the void from Sculthorpe, Flanagan could be the man

Part of the reason for that is that we've had a succession of coaches who have refused to play Wilkin there.

Why tho?

Perhaps they have all thought that he wasn't very good there? He might think he is, and occasionally he might be, but perhaps the coaching staff don't. Or they think he better suits second row? (to put a positive spin on it!) Royce started with him playing at 13 last season, until injuries began to bite hard and he was used as reinforcement elsewhere. But Wilkin never went back into 13 after that so far as I can recall. If it had just been one coach then it could be called a preference but it has been more than one so there must be something in Wilkin's game that persuades coaches not to play him at 13.

It is strange that nearly every coach didn't seem to like wilkin at 13. I can see royces way of thinking as he liked the extra prop at 13 ( I also like this) but as you've said, other coaches ain't played him there.

When we signed Flanagan, i didnt really remember a great deal about what he was like going forward, from his time at Wigan.

However, what i did remember is always thinking he was a good defender, and he has only cemented that view whilst playing for us, and he cant half hit.

I think all three of Royce's recruits are spot on.