Yes. What benefit is a 3rd hooker?

If they are better than what we have then of course there's a benefit

Didn't Corey Johnson have a sint with York last year?

I'd imagine Kear may have him ahead of Flanagan

So we are paying for George Flanagan to sit on the sidelines?

It's a waste of the budget having 3 hookers.

In the same vain then why don’t we just have a squad of 17 is strength in depth is a waste of money?

Hallas was capable of covering at hooker (albeit not very well) and he's gone. Flanagan is knocking on and vulnerable to the odd suspension inducing brainfart. That leaves Doyle playing the majority of matches as first choice. Lose him to injury or loss of form and we're up the creek.

It's not like we really have anyone in the academy at this moment in time knocking on the door. I'd imagine Johnson might be chosen ahead of Flanagan anyway. Can't understand why anyone would think this is a bad move. Hooker is a specialist position. Only takes one injury or suspension and we're scrambling around to get someone in on an emergency loan.

Its intriguing what made him retire from the game aged 21, and then a year or so later decide to play again.

Johnsons absolute quality, id have him in our 17 over Dwyer, but can see the merit of another good stint in a very competitive Championship. If he's joining you on a long term loan, then its a good move for Bradford imo.

Looks like Jarrod O'Connor is on his way to us.