I see Wilkin is filling the gap Wellens left for the bulletin board bashers!

Far too premature. I'd still have Wilkin as one of our top three 2nd row/loose options. He's in the team on merit in those positions, and doubly so because of his utility in being able to cover half-back too.

As for the issue about too many cooks, well that's just a coaching issue. If he's told to defend out wide, run those lines he used to in his first 5 years, and not worry about kicking/passing, then I'm sure he will.

How about we try to get through this season without picking a scapegoat for once?

I'm not scapegoating, I simply don't see how everyone fits in. Greenwood, Thompson and Jones need time on the pitch to continue their development, and I question whether wilkin (and flanagan) bring more than the kids - especially considering how it impacts the team as a whole.

Yet people post that players play too many games.
So plenty of games in a year to develop players.

tbh people need to bash Cunningham not Wilkin as he picks the team. I'm disappointed Hewitt hasnt been given a run out and tbh I'd like to have seen Lance on the bench this season , he would have certainly helped perk us up on friday I think.

So I gather between Wilkin bashing and defending posts that nobody knows anything about Walsh?

I saw Walsh after South Sydney game & he said he was targeting this Friday to be back playing so will hopefully see him back this week

So that means Walsh in for Burns and Richards in for Amor.

Richards was already in LMS to prop, Jones to lock and turner back to centre I'd guess...

Hope not, Lance should be in the 17 for Wakey.

Out of favour apparently.

We've had 3 games can't play everyone, every week. That's not the same as out of favour. I can see why they chose to play Wilkin, given he held the ship together at times, but I think that has now run it's course with Lance, Burns, Walsh and Hewitt all available.

In all seriousness, none of those 4 could yet replace Wilkin's leadership/organisational role on the field yet. Walsh will need to focus on getting through his first couple of games before he gets back to full-on midfield general. Burns is still a newbie who - let's not repeat the thread - is not yet in a position of being able to direct the action, Hohaia is never an on-field leader, and Hewitt is a kid who's barely played any first team ever. Wilkin, on the other hand, is a vastly experienced ex-GB international, multi-trophy winner and long-time club leader with a good rugby brain and a vocal leadership method, as well as being club captain.

Can we just nip this in the bud a bit ? Unless he's injured, or has an absolute shocker of a standard way below every other forward on the field - neither of which is the case - then Wilkin will be in the side. He'll be there on merit too. I think he brings more to the side as a package than any of the other forwards bar the specialists Roby, Amor and Walmsley.

I know a lot of people like Greenwood, Thompson and Richards. I like them too. But I'd never name any of them above Wilkin. Likewise, I'm still a long way from selecting Flanagan, LMS, Savelio, Mose or Vea ahead of Wilkin either.

I'm not his mum, but I think this grumbling about Wilkin is really badly misplaced. This isn't a Wellens situation from last year, where there were clearly several people who were simply physically able to contribute much more to the team than Wello at fullback or loose. Wilkin is easily in our top three back-rowers, and in terms of minutes offered, tackles made, leadership offered, and positional flexibility, remains at the top of my list.

To be fair I just meant with Wilkin playing at 7. He can still provide leadership and the like in the pack. But I would rather see him at the back of the scrum kicking once or twice a match. Injecting himself into the kicking role when needed, but we have Lance our marquee signing who can do a job at halfback and should not be frozen out when Wilkin can play in a role that he is better suited to.

Even at the end of the last match Wilkin refered to people having low expectations in his halfback role.

Fair enough. I agree that I'd certainly have Burns and Walsh ahead of Wilkin in the halves. I haven't seen any Hewitt to form a view, but I'm guessing there's a reason why the coaching staff don't see fit to use him when injury opens up a space. As for Lance, I'm afraid I struggle to see a way back for the lad. He was so consistently mediocre for the first 3 years here, no matter what position he played, that I just don't see how he stakes a claim back in the team. It's a shame, because he came with high hopes, but his move to Saints hasn't been a success, and the lack of interest from other clubs in taking him away and giving him a first team regular spot speaks volumes about how widespread the view is that he's now a fringe player.