No hate here, he is a bit too average to be taking up an overseas spot though imo.

Flannery is solid, there's no hate, he's nothing more than solid and an import. He played really well in a couple of games last year, was it Leeds at home where he got motm? But then didn't show those standards again.

What do you mean? Are you saying he's actually brilliant but we're all too stupid to realise it?

I don't hate Flannery but (like many others) I think there are a few issues with him.



1. He is using a quota space which for someone solid is not great.

2. He should be more than a solid player. He has shown flashs of being a star but he has never done it week in week out.

3. He doesn't seem to create enough for his centres, which given the talent we have had in our back line is frustrating.

4. We have at least 4 young players (Ashurst, Maggenis, Dixon, Clough) that can do everything he does but he gets picked every week because he is a quota player (Aussie coaches don't drop aussie players).

5. He came over as a utility player that could play stand off and centre as well as second row. When in fact he is a pudding at centre and clearly not creative enough for stand off.

6. Without knowing his salary its hard to say but I imagine he is over paid for what we get out of him.



He has been a good player for us but I can not see us renewing his contract after this year.

I like Flannery he is a very underrated player and we really miss him when he is out of the team. His work rate is excellent and he is well worth a place in our team, whether that is a quota spot or not. We need players like him in our team. I would not mind if he was offered an extension to his contract.

He's similar to Phil Bailey.



I'm not a massive fan of Bailey but you do realise how big his presence is when he's missing from the team. Any hardworking, solid & former Australian international will do alot of very good & often unoticed work particularily in defence and their experience will rub off onto youngsters.



However, for the signing there must a decent balance between wages and quota spots in relation to the rest of the squad.

All good teams need solid players. Why should we only buy British ones?







He's not a star. Setting him up as such to then knock him over because he isn't = dishonest.







What talent? Excluding youngsters this is the worst Saints back line since before Benyon.







The first three are still a good way behind him. Maggenis isn't even a sometime first-team player yet! Clough is half second-row, half prop - not a good point of comparison.







He came over as a player who could do a good job in a number of positions - not Mal Meninga, Brett Kenney and Nathan Hindmarsh rolled into one.







You're prepared to ditch a useful player on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. If this isn't hate I don't know what is.

Flannery does the things that coaches see and that fans don`t. He`s a solid player. Sadly he comes with a SOO reputation and that leads many fans to think he should make line breaks, crucial offloads all the time he is involved.

I think we miss Flannery's graft when he isn't around. Every team needs grafters and we need to give our grafters more credit for the work that they do, which often goes unnoticed by fans.

And he's busy doing that part time acting job on 'Caualty'.



This thread brings up a very good point. Since Saints have started playing a bit better and Meli has cut down on his "Oh nooooo Meli" moments, so who is our present scapegoat? If it's not Meli or Flannery then is it still Potter?



Is it back to Gardner?



How about big TP?



We need to know because I wouldn't want to go against the herd and make a scapegoat out of someone who was still popular. I'd feel embarrassed.

I'm not really sure what the point of this thread is, you seem to be trying to pick a fight for no particular reason. So far you've called people dishonest, accused them of hating a player who they clearly don't hate and basically said that we're all (except you) too dim to see the talent that the Australian game (and you) can see clearly.



Flannery has had the odd great game but mostly he's just average. The reason we shouldn't sign average Aussies is because there's a lot of average British players about who could do with the game time to become better than average and maybe even very good.

I'm not picking a fight with anyone. I just want to know the reasons behind the Flannery bashing. If it's a good argument I'm prepared to listen to it. If it's a house Straw Man argument setting Flannery up as a "supposedly" great player (despite never being described as such in Australia) and then knocking him over BECAUSE he isn't - I'm going to call it as such. And slating the guy for his "supposed" wages - without KNOWING his wages is just dishonesty - plain and simple.



As for the Australians having a better understanding of player abilities - I think that's a perfectly justifiable argument to make, given the media exposure and critical analysis offered in that country over a broad range of TV, radio and print. The kind we lack here because of the sport's limited appeal.

where is the hate??? I've never seen or heard anyone saying that they hate Flannery.



I fully agree with most of the comments, he is the Australian equivalent of a Mike Bennett or Paul Clough - all clubs need that solid workhorse type of player, but whether that person should be an Aussie quota player is another matter.



If he was British, definately extend his contract. As he is on quota I would rather get a better Aussie in in the backline or at prop, and use one of the many backrowers we already have in his place.

I'd have to say i've never seen any "hate" directed at him, have you?

There's nothing "supposedly" about it, if he's played SOO a few times then he was obviously at one time very good indeed. So when we sign a player with that rep we expect to see some of that ability on the field. Even you would surely admit that the Flannery we have at Saints wouldn't have a prayer of getting into SOO based on the form we've seen from him.



As regards his "supposed" wages, he's clearly on more than he could get in Australia, why else would he come here? If people believe he's on a large wage which they think is too much they might be right and they might be wrong, but they're only dishonest if they know they're wrong when they say it surely?



I agree that the Aussies know their stuff as regards playing ability so if you can show me a report that says he's playing well from an Australian source (or any source for that matter) I'll happily agree. But if you can find one that says he played really well in Australia before he came here doesn't that go against your point that we shouldn't expect him to be great?

Very good doing WHAT? Busting every second tackle, or being a flexible and intelligent utility player who won't let you down when you need to use him







Flannery was one of many rated NRL players who took time to get to grips with his club's methods. No one blamed Willie Talau for being a bit dicey when he was first roped into the team. Some players take time to adjust to SL. Look at Matt King - it was only after two seasons of underachieving that he began to look the real thing.



Flannery is unlucky because injuries have prevented him from getting the ideal number of consecutive games under his belt. It takes time to get over an injury. Even when the physical scars have left - the psychological ones (especially to confidence) often lurk in the mind for quite a while. All I know is that whenever Flannery has managed to string a good number of games together he has looked impressive. He's no Harry Pinner - but he can pass a ball either way with equal accuracy (a skill that eludes many SL players). He's a very safe tackler. He makes few mistakes. He runs excellent angles near the line. He supports the kicker's short game. He's athletic, fit, not afraid of tackling, weighs in with tries, has solid hands and - most of all - offers solid utility in a number of positions.



Now, look at the above and tell me how many CURRENT Saints back row forwards meet the same criteria.







Speculation. We are not privvy to the minutes of his contract negotiations with the NRL - or Saints.







Bull. If you haven't the foggiest idea about Player Xs income, you can't use a bit of alchemy to transmute ignorance into hard evidence and then damn him with it. From Dictionary.com











Australian journos concentrate on the NRL. They are hardly interested in the goings on in what they perceive to be an inferior competition. Well - apart from when the ritual hammerings are handed out in the internationals.

waffle. You are saying he isnt just an average import, please show us how where he has performed consistantly to deserve a quota spot. I'll compare him to our best young british backrower, Cloughy last year www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 and a player , imo worth his quota spot, tony P www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 He is just average, as you think otherwise, please show me some evidence

waffle. You are saying he isnt just an average import, please show us how where he has performed consistantly to deserve a quota spot. I'll compare him to our best young british backrower, Cloughy last year www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 and a player , imo worth his quota spot, tony P www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 He is just average, as you think otherwise, please show me some evidence

There is no hate for Flannery.



I think the issues come because:



a). He's a quota player - you expect the best from your overseas players purely because you are limited to how many you have.

b). He is similar to all our other back rowers i.e. small - our back row lack a bit of size. I think if Puletua or Soliola played in there, you'd be able to appreciate the value of Flannery more.



I personally value Flannery as a good squad player to have for his versatility and work rate. He's a good, solid player and doesn't let us down wherever he plays. It's good to have players of that ilk who can cover more than one position. Roby, Wheeler, Eastmond, Pryce, Wilkin, Wellens (anymore?) are all similar in that they can cover different roles effectively. Flannery is the same.



But, if the chance came up to bring in a top Aussie replacement, Flannery would have to go.

I think somebody has a little crush on someone here.

Quote Saint Simon="Saint Simon"waffle. You are saying he isnt just an average import, please show us how where he has performed consistantly to deserve a quota spot. I'll compare him to our best young british backrower, Cloughy last year www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 and a player , imo worth his quota spot, tony P www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 He is just average, as you think otherwise, please show me some evidence'" Quote Saint Simon"Now, look at the above and tell me how many CURRENT Saints back row forwards meet the same criteria."'" I deal in evidence - not dishonesty.

Quote Saint Simon="Saint Simon"waffle. You are saying he isnt just an average import, please show us how where he has performed consistantly to deserve a quota spot. I'll compare him to our best young british backrower, Cloughy last year www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 and a player , imo worth his quota spot, tony P www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010 He is just average, as you think otherwise, please show me some evidence'" Quote Saint Simon"Now, look at the above and tell me how many CURRENT Saints back row forwards meet the same criteria."'" I deal in evidence - not dishonesty.

so show us some that shows Flannery isnt just average. I suspect you can't

i'm still waiting for the evidence of a hatred towards Flannery.

Because solid second rowers is what british clubs do best. Saints Academy have produced many in the last decade. This is why our national side has a good pack and poor backs. Teams need to use there quota wisely to provide something that can not be provided by a domestic player.







He is a Queensland SOO player. The amount of people who were talking about what a star Dallas Johnson was when he signed for Catalan shows this as the two players are quite comparable, Johnson is slightly better but not by a great amount. I think Flannery does have the talent to be a star in Superleague. Some of his performances have proved that (Wire in the cup and an away game at Huddersfield come to mind). I think you are selling him short here.







If you read the comment I say "have had", I have based this over the last 3 years Flannery has been here. Flannery is the kind of player that is great going through a hole in the defense. He rarely gets this at saints unfortunately.







Like I said in comment 1 there are lots of similar players in the team. Flannery is more experienced than them so they will only reach his level by playing games. It is this sort of short sited-ness that has resulted in the poor state of our national team and is what the franchise system was brought in to combat.

Given the choice of Flannery Vs a big aussie/kiwi prop most fans would say the prop would provide more.







But he doesn't. He does a good job at second rower. In other positions he is simply plugging a gap.







Its common sense brought about by watching all Saints games and making rational observations based on what I see. I do not want to ditch anyone. It is just that if you look at our current squad we have a lot of working second rowers and not may skillful backs or big forwards. In the age of the salary cap and the overseas quota teams have to choose between players.



If players become available then the Saints board may have to choose. If there are no more suitable players available then I am sure we will offer him a contract.



It’s not a question of Flannery being a good player, it a question of him being the right player for the team. I like him and appreciate him as a player and i am sure he will have a great career (at saints or not)



If you don't like my (or anyone else’s) answer then maybe you should not ask the question in future.

Good post. That is a good comparison.

It is a good comparison - both could be replaced with equivalent/better British players or vastly superior Australians.