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.

Just a pitty Royce wasn't

How is the membership at the Royce Simmons fan club going?

But all those coaches have wanted a workhorse, rather than a ball player, at 13 really. Scully was starting to miss a lot of matches and his stats for the year don't suggest him being much of a playmaker in 2006 for Andersons first full season (17 appearances, 4 tries, 2 assists, 10 attacking kicks) compared to 2004 when he had 22 appearances, 10 tries, 19 assists, 73 attacking kicks (2003 has similar stats).

So maybe it's just unfortunate timing for him and the style of play the coaches have wanted?

I ain't got clue why nearly every coach prefers him as a second row. I could understand maybe one not wanting him a 13 but not all.

i remember watching flanagan in a saints Vs Scum clash at KR and thinking he was a tackleing machine and he was still a youngish player, couple of years down under seem to have really helped his alround game, i really like the lad and can only see him getting better