Dixon only played early as flannery took ill at London on game day. Flannery was selected over Dixon.

I know that was the case with the game in London but there were a couple of games at the end of Royce's reign when Flannery was in the 19 (Hull was 1 if I recollect correctly) were Dixon was selected and he started and Flannery was on the bench or not in the team. I also recollect Royce being very complimentary about Dixon-all that I was implying was I think he had changed Royce's opinion of him.

I rate Dixon, and I'd liked him to have stayed as a squad player / back up option.

Maybe he wanted more than this (and if he didn't, he should if he has any ambition at all), maybe our cap doesn't stretch to the luxury of keeping him and his wage demands for a back up player.

Either way, he has signed for Salford. We're not talking a player in demand by any of the major players in SL. The argument that we should have kept him rather than sign the ever-impressive Manu puzzles me.

Manu is 10 times the player Dixon is or ever will be. If we ever need another Dixon we can pull one out of the academy any time. Get a bloody clue for once in your life.

So your quite happy for us to go down the Wigan road and sign overrated over the hill players like they did in 2005/06 and continue to langish in 4th or 5th and have a battle with relegation in that time???? Sorry I would like to see our young crop of players be given a long run in the side to cement a first team place. Dixon was showing real signs of improvement at the start of the year and looked liked becoming a strong backrower. Ok he has his faults but under a strong coaching team he could have improved further and become a strong backrower.

I'm quite happy for us to go down the "build the best possible team" route, yes.

Dicko should've gone out on loan by now.