What did you think of his performances in the reserves?

Genuine question.

We lose a good young'un like Flanagan, yet some are keen that we sign Bailey for another year. I know who'd i'd rather keep. If Noble or Lenegan aren't speaking to him then what's the guy to do? Some things never change...

Perhaps.

He is the more senior of the young 2nd rows I have mentioned hence why he got his chance in the first team; however that is not to say that he has the most potential out of them.

At the time we needed to fill the gap left by our best 2nd rower being banned. It was not a time to blood a rookie, hence why Mossop was brought back from his loan and Flanagan was brought into the team.

He has done a job for us at the back end of the season and is a great prospect.
But be totally honest with yourself, would you have offered him a contract extension before his first team debut?

The few time I had watched him before he came into the first team he was playing very well, tackling hard and making good metres. I don't go to every reserve match, but someone must have seen his potential to give
him a chance in the first team.

How would you rate him against Chris Gerrard, he seems to be somewhat of the forgotten man after captaining England Academy a couple of years ago, has he failed to make the step up to reserves?

So we have no idea as a club how a player will adapt to 1st team rugby, keep him around the place / on loan for 2.5 years, and finally give him a chance against Saints, Leeds and in the semi final and he acquits himself well. We then proceed to pick him before other prospects even though he is leaving at the end of the season.

Why is anyone surprised?

Watched him play a couple of weeks back against saints, he's a great guy, but doesn't seem to be progresing aswell as I thought he would, but there's time he's only young so time will tell.

I made the same point a short time ago that young players could/should get a chance at this sort of age but apparently it is all different now and never happens according to some on here. Making débuts as Farrell and Edwards did at that age are a thing of the past apparently.

Richard Owen from Cas who impressed people at the game on Sunday in this thread [urlhttp://viewtopic.php?t=431221&start=15[/url is only 18.

Dave

Think what I and most other people who stated what you losely claim in your post above said it is the exception rather than the rule.

The point you made was that Myler and Westerman did not need to go out on loan prior to playing SL which was floored as both played NL1 prior to moving into SL.

Owen is 19.

I'd never deny that he's got talent, but I never really thought him big enough for the back row or fast enough for stand off, and this seems to have been the conventional wisdom among those I usually watch the reserves with.

He's been better in the last few weeks than I ever thought he would, but, though I'm not a fan of Nobby and am fairly cool about IL at present (mainly over the coaching thing), if I was to slag them off on the strength of this, I'd be being clever with hindsight.

When it was first announced that he was going to Aus, there wasn't much fuss, so I'm guessing that quite a few others felt the same way.

The fact of the matter is they were playing SL for their clubs as teenagers and Flanagan and Tomkins were not. That is the most pertinent point.

I have no idea if Owen at Cas has ever played at NL1 level for Cas but he made his first team début at 17 I think and was playing in a play off game at 18 on Sunday.

Who knows where Hayne played his RL before making his début and holding down a regular place as a teenager in 1st grade but he was a regular player as a teenager.

I am sure you can go to most SL teams and find other players who are regular 1st 17 players as teenagers.

Flanagan clearly thinks he had been overlooked and who can blame him at age 21 only getting games with the first team.

Dave