I concur that I don't think the little niggles are anything to worry about at this stage. Maybe if its still going on in a year we should start to worry. His body should toughen up to first team knocks.

Someone mentioned paul anderson, didn't he have an ilness as opposed to an injury when he was younger? I seem to remember him breaking his leg in a tackle from Apollo, but I may be mistaken.

Leave the lad alone. He's just having a bit of bad luck. It can happen to anyone.

As far as injuries go we're often talking about seconds or split-seconds in the decision-making process which are the difference between i.e. being tackled, hitting the earth and then playing the ball or catching your studs in the turf, going over awkwardly and rupturing your cruciate.

The gap between being in the right place at the right time and being in the wrong place at the wrong time is fractional and every second you're on the pitch you're gambling with your health.

Wheeler has had a few rolls of the dice go against him lately. His luck will change. Tommy Martyn went through the same problems earlier in his career and then blossomed when his luck returned.

Moving sports, Steven Gerrard was [iperpetually[/i injured during his early twenties. Never a week went by when he wasn't being treated for something or another. His luck changed - just as Wheeler's (and Lomax's) will.

You're a hero.

Grade II hamstring injury... 3/4 weeks on the sidelines for young Gary

Gerrard's wasn't anything to do with luck. His groin problems stemmed from his body not being able to cope with his sudden growth spurt as he broke into the Liverpool first team.

Wouldn't you say that was unlucky?

Jeez, I remeber that feeling.

I would say that Gerrard had a specific injury that could be nailed down with treatment. Once that was rectified he pretty much ever present for the next few years for Liverpool. Wheeler seems to get injured in different areas on a regular basis. Maybe using the word luck to describe them was wrong but I was getting at the fact that the OP was wrong to use Gerrard as a yardstick for Wheeler. Had he used Darren Anderton he would have been a hell of a lot closer.

Nigel Wright was a similar unlucky player.

It was a real shame what happened to him. I was gutted when he went to Wigan as I think we were after him at the time. Turned out okay for us given the player that Tommy Martyn developed into, but Wright would have been a top player with some better luck.

I think he took unlucky to a new level - didnt he end up back at Wakey on loan , played well again went back to Wigan then got another bad injury?

He certainly did.

I was sat behind him at a Wigan v Wakey academy U21 game a couple of years ago. Wright was then coach of their U21 side and a Wakey lad was having a nightmare of a game. The assistant coach wanted to sub the poor player, but Wright said "leave him on and make him suffer"

He's a great bloke to have a rugby conversation with, and was such a talented player, but he defined the term unlucky or injury prone, whichever you chose.

Gerrard suffered a number of injuries during that two/three-year period - not a simple succession of re-occurrences. And, IIRC, the diagnosis was speculative rather than definitive. Recall that Gerrard was passed among a host of specialists and consultants (some of which were not in agreement) before the notion of a skeletal/muscular weakness gained credence. I certainly can't recall many players who've been similarly diagnosed since (if any!), which makes me wonder whether there was any truth to it. And even if there was an underlying weakness - it still required some event (a tackle, jump, tumble etc.) to overload it and put him on the treatment table - which means being in the wrong place at the wrong time (a split second either way and the overload doesn't occur), which is also known as Bad Luck.

The term "injury prone" is bandied about far too often for my liking. At best it's a gross oversimplification and often used as a cheap way of justifying an instinctive dislike of a player (who should be got rid of).

Even the likeliest candidates for the label have a huge escape clause. Just because a player has been dogged with ... say ... knee injuries, it doesn't automatically follow that the next injury is a result of what came earlier. After all, who's to say a healthy knee put under similar load wouldn't fail?

I've took the following from Wikipedia (yeah, I know, but it is essentially what I'm getting at)

[iHowever, he began to suffer from nagging back problems, which sports consultant Hans-Wilhelm Müller-Wohlfahrt later diagnosed as a result of accelerated growth, coupled with excessive playing, during his teenage years.[7 He was then beset by groin injuries that required four separate operations.[/i

So Gerrard did suffer a number of injuries, but it was all related to the same thing. It wasn't a speculative diagnosis as he played even more regularly once the problem was solved. Even in Gerrard's [iperpetually[/i injury ravaged early career, he played a minimum of 75% of league games for Liverpool once he had broken into the first team in 2000. Not bad for someone who was always injured and I'd be surprised if Gary Wheeler has played 50% of games since he became first choice at Saints.

Look, I'm not having a go at Wheeler. I'm arguing that putting Wheeler who has suffered a variety of injuries up against Gerrard who suffered from one specific problem and over time had it sorted is wrong. Football and Rugby League are two completely different sports and you can't judge them as Gerrard is never going to be hit by a 20 stone prop forward (unless he's playing against Yakubu) so there are no real paralells to draw.

My main concern is whether Wheeler's body is up to the rigours of Super League at this stage. You put it down to luck. I'm wondering whether it has something to do with his/Saints handling of his conditioning. How many games does Sam Tomkins miss? Is he just lucky? Is it just recurring bad luck for all of the young lads at Saints breaking through or do we need to look at their collective conditioning?

Tomkins looks like Roby, build wise, who also never suffered when his was coming through. Very wirey and robust - look at the way either of them can hang on in a tackle.
I remember when eastmond literally couldn't put a full 80 minutes together without going off injured (apprently he was prone to it in the reserves aswell). Its a concern for the team when we've got a player who's not fit, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Besides, as his career moves on he may just relise that these niggles happen to every one and they just have to get strapped up and get on the field?

Wheeler may just be one of those players that just wants to be fully fit before he plays. I'm sure it won't be long before he realises that pro rugby players spend the majority of their careers playing with an injury.

Too true, look at the pictures of Apollo towards the end of his playing career he was practically a mummy under his saints shirt... knocks are part of the job am sure Wheels body will get more used to taking them the more he plays

For me the worry is not that he misses games, it's that he never seems to be able to last a full one. I can't remember the last time he completed a full 80.

I do agree that he should be given time though, he's too talented not to.

Saints had the chance to let Wheeler go last year, but chose to upgrade his contract.

Very true.

Definitely don't want his stomach growing anymore either whilst he is sat on the sidelines!

Huh? He's completed the full 80 many times. Even with a cut down to the bone.

I likred wright, as a kid people said i was same style as wright, funny it was a series of injuries that did me too!