Re: Luke Walsh : Tue Mar 03, 2015 5:02 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Wilkin is a far better player than Flanagan.
.

As an all round player, I agree, but I'm still haunted by previous seasons in which an underphysical (yet talented) pack stifled us - especially in the derby. Wilkin was probably the prime example of this. Admittedly , those days are gone and, as I say, Wilkin on work rate alone is a decent member of our pack.

Dux wrote:

I'd much prefer Wilkin to Flanagan in the back row. He has a similar work-rate and is, for me, streets ahead in attack. He's pretty physical as well, when he's not got game-management to think about.

I might disagree, slightly. Whilst his targeted defence is very good, he really struggles to dominate in defence, which Flash excels in. Flash is more likely to cause a slow PTB and Wilkin is more likely to give a penalty trying.
His best application in attack would be picking those lines outwide, in which Greenwood and Vea had so much success in the first two rounds.
I think Flash may be a little underrated in attack, but admit Wilkin brings more.

Re: Luke Walsh : Tue Mar 03, 2015 5:57 pm  

I reckon Wilkin has the edge on Flanagan with play options, don,t forget we have struggled for 4 or 5 years to get some decent half back partnership, Wilkin dropped in bulk to provide the "stop gap" which really hasn,t got filled until we see the Walsh/ Burns pairing.
In the absence of Wello we seem to have dropped into "Wilkin Bashing" mode, Wilkin will never be a half back so he won,t have a consistent performance, but fans will demand it.
This is Walshy,s last season and we need to establish a good postion in the league because of the new format, this might mean Hewitt might not get his chance yet until a backlog of injuries start to bite.
Walsh and Burns will take a lot of pressure off Wilkin, so until that happens I think we need to give him some slack.

Re: Luke Walsh : Tue Mar 03, 2015 6:46 pm  

Dux wrote:

I'd much prefer Wilkin to Flanagan in the back row. He has a similar work-rate and is, for me, streets ahead in attack. He's pretty physical as well, when he's not got game-management to think about.

I agree but I don't think Wilkin will wabt to take the ball up anymore and that then becomes a problem.

Re: Luke Walsh : Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:12 pm  

St pete wrote:

I agree but I don't think Wilkin will wabt to take the ball up anymore and that then becomes a problem.

If that happens he needs to be sat next to Cunningham or in the commentary box

Re: Luke Walsh : Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:43 pm  

St pete wrote:

I agree but I don't think Wilkin will wabt to take the ball up anymore and that then becomes a problem.

No different to Flanagan then.

Re: Luke Walsh : Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:04 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

No different to Flanagan then.

Yes and that's my point. It took some time but we got there in the end.

Re: Luke Walsh : Tue Mar 03, 2015 11:04 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

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.

I am told by a sponsor that when they asked that was the reply from the management i.e. "out of favour" and he will not get a new deal.

Personally I'd prefer to see him in the halves over Wilkin but this is what I was told.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:04 am  

saint at wire wrote:

I am told by a sponsor that when they asked that was the reply from the management i.e. "out of favour" and he will not get a new deal.

Personally I'd prefer to see him in the halves over Wilkin but this is what I was told.

And he doesnt want to stay either.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:31 am  

To me that's just nuts.

How can someone be out of favour so early in the season?? What if Burns or someone else gets an injury??? Do we want a player to feel out of favour when we may need him later on in the year?

Yes he is not the half we wanted when we bought him, but never seen him shirk the work, and he does have some skills we could use and need, now or later on in the season.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:51 am  

cunningham should put lomax along side of travis burns..and put wellens at fullback and put wilkin selling hot dogs....his kicking game is a joke.and that kicking on the 3rd tackle wants stopping as well..i heard walsh is fit but has a problem in his head of playing again fear of getting injured!....with wakey getting thrashed by widnes webster wont want another display like that..so if saints play like they did against cas i can see us getting the thrashing!