Flanagan

[claretblue]

https://www.thisisanfield.com/2017/06/j ... ent-wrong/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CleggHall]

A sad, realistic article.
Flanagan never got over the Accrington Stanley match where he was mauled/exposed by level 4 players.
A poor signing who will find it difficult rebuilding his career.

[IanMcL]

He showed a flash of his pace at seasons end.

[IndigoLake]

Reading the article, I have no idea what James Benson is going on about:

"I don’t know why we signed him. He’s got Premier League pedigree in the sense that he’s played at this level, but so have our other full-backs. Last summer’s recruitment was poor – not that it really showed – and taking Flanagan on loan screamed desperation. He’d barely played in almost two years and it felt like he was just brought in to add a body, rather than real quality, to the squad."

This talk just smacks of hindsight to me. I seem to remember that the general consensus when Flanagan signed was positive. He was someone who had done well to break into the Liverpool side but had been unlucky with injuries. For all we knew then, he would provide a good challenge to the RB position. I certainly didn't feel it was desperate that we signed him - only that it didn't work out as is sometimes the case in football.

[RingoMcCartney]

My abiding memory of Flani Alves was against Lincoln when Barton and him launched a Lincoln player then Joey won an oscer for his "dive".

Straight out of the scouse guide book on being a Good Scally!

[jedi_master]

Very poor player, fitness an issue of course, but his actual ability was also highly questionable.

[taio]

Based on what we saw last season he is nowhere near good enough at this level

[CaptJohn]

Perhaps my lasting memory of him was when he cleaned out a Boro player in the Boxing Day match right in front of their fans in the 2nd half and deservedly got a yellow card. I immediately thought "liability," as the free kick was in a very dangerous spot.

[Quickenthetempo]

He played well for Brendan Rodgers so maybe Celtic could be his next destination?

He won't get tested that often up there and would gain confidence from winning every week.

[JimmyRobbo]

Agree with Indigo #54. Certainly was not a desperate signing. Bamford would more likely go into that category.

Flanagan was a very good player before injuries. The type of player that we would be very unlikely to sign from one of the big clubs (a little cough, Kean, cough). Unfortunately, he didn't look like the same player that he was 3 or 4 years ago. Praise the board for going for it. Seemingly little risk with potentially very big reward.

I hope he can gain his confidence back and speed/strength. He used to be a full blooded player that all fans would want playing in their colours.

Good luck to him. It didn't really work out here.

[tim_noone]

He played well for Brendan Rodgers so maybe Celtic could be his next destination?

He won't get tested that often up there and would gain confidence from winning every week.

My thoughts exactly. All the best to him.

[ClaretTony]

A sad, realistic article.
Flanagan never got over the Accrington Stanley match where he was mauled/exposed by level 4 players.
A poor signing who will find it difficult rebuilding his career.

Not having that - that was his first game for us and he went on to have some good games deputising for our full backs. Played well against Palace at home and Middlesbrough at home and did really well when he came on for Ward at Palace. So to suggest he didn't get over Accy is a bit far fetched for me.

[Winstonswhite]

Poor signing of a poor player. Gives 100% but unfortunately let's his heart rule his head on too many occasions.

I can't remember who said it but stating that he tackles like an 8 year old is bob on. In my opinion he wants to crunch into every 50/50. And he can't pass the ball either. On other days the ref would have given penalties at both old Trafford and Palace which would have cost us big time. In effect he's a liability.

Ultimately he's not good enough for the Premier League and to be honest I don't think he'd make it into Blackburns side and that's saying something.

[ClaretTony]

On other days the ref would have given penalties at both old Trafford and Palace which would have cost us big time.

They would, but they would have both been wrong decisions. But I take your point that he allowed himself to get into those positions. I thought he was very good at Palace replacing Ward who, for me, was our best player until he went off.

Flanagan is maybe a player who looked good in that challenging Liverpool team because he was alongside good players or maybe he's not recovered sufficiently from his injuries. I don't know for sure on either but I suppose it didn't help him that our full backs had ever improving, good seasons.

[Quicknick]

He can't be that bad. He's played for England.

[taio]

He can't be that bad. He's played for England.

So did Michael Ricketts

[FulledgeClaret]

He has missed the best part of 2-3 yrs of what is crucial stage in a defenders development (20-25). maybe a full season with a championship side where he will get games would be the best thing to get him back on track as he did look a good player for Liverpool before the injury.

[Braindead]

Reading the article, I have no idea what James Benson is going on about:

"I don’t know why we signed him. He’s got Premier League pedigree in the sense that he’s played at this level, but so have our other full-backs. Last summer’s recruitment was poor – not that it really showed – and taking Flanagan on loan screamed desperation. He’d barely played in almost two years and it felt like he was just brought in to add a body, rather than real quality, to the squad."

This talk just smacks of hindsight to me. I seem to remember that the general consensus when Flanagan signed was positive. He was someone who had done well to break into the Liverpool side but had been unlucky with injuries. For all we knew then, he would provide a good challenge to the RB position. I certainly didn't feel it was desperate that we signed him - only that it didn't work out as is sometimes the case in football.

Absolutely bang on.

It was pretty universal on here and amongst all Clarets I spoke to was that Flanagan would bring good competition for both full back positions.
I agree with the fact that he needs to drop down to the championship to re-establish his career, but to suggest after the season that he was a poor signing is plain ********.

[Vegas Claret]

I was really happy when we signed him, maybe he didn't get games as our lads did very well (perhaps better than most of us expected). I'll not be sorry to see him go though as he did scare the living daylights out of me every time he went in for a tackle haha

[Clarets4me]

I was rather hoping we could sign Joe Allen from Stoke last season, if only to hear a Commentator announce that Burnley were making a change, and bringing " Flanagan and Allen " on from the subs bench....

NB: A cultural reference for some of our Senior posters, I fancy !

[jlup1980]

I was pleased when we signed him but I saw enough in the Accy game to realise he wasn't going to be up to scratch for more than the odd cameo. Overall I thought he had a couple of decent games against Palace and Boro at home but that was about it (I wasn't at Palace so can't comment on his performance down there). The more worrying thing for me were the performances against Accy, Bristol City and Lincoln. He was awful in all those games; I'd highlight that he got absolutely murdered against Bristol City, especially in the first half. He never looked comfortable on the ball and seemed to run into tackles in a similar fashion to my 6 year old son. It's a shame that his injuries have clearly impacted his progression, because I willing to believe that he was much better when he first broke onto the scene at Liverpool, but the PL is beyond him currently. A season in the Championship will show whether he has the ability to compete anymore.