Now THAT would be just cause for panic. Don't like the cheese and onion ones do I?

2nd in the table is pretty good to say we have not played particularly well yet.

Time is running out though and we have got to start hitting some consistent form. We need to get a "roll" on or this season will just be another 2006.

The only good news for us is that no team is playing with a high level of consistency yet, though Huddersfield could be my dark horse team to go all the way to GF.

If Huddersfield make the GF it just goes to show how s[ih[/iit SL is.

They're crap.

He could've done what he's done quite a lot recently and put Watkins or Gibson on the bench, allowing Senior to move into the 2nd row.

Or he could've played Worrall, something he's done many, many times before now.

If this was really just another league game to Mclennan what made this one so different from the 20+ previous league games where he's trusted Worrall to be good enough to play?

It's a garbage excuse for a brain fart frankly.

can't be that rubbish - only 2 points behind us now! & probably IMO playing better than us

What he did with Worrall on Friday wasn't a one off and I'd imagine he pretty much did it for the same reason he gave post match.

Should he take off a player who he sees as a potential game breaker in Lauitiiti, Jones-Buchanan (possibly even Ablett?) and put on someone who he sees as limited in that game breaking role?

I'd have been equally interested in the response on here if he'd replaced Lauitiiti with Worrall when Leeds were chasing the game.

Isn't it the case that the coach is struggling for forwards he has faith in?

I think what is abffling is that someone is named with no intention of playing him, unless the team is coasting by 60 mins. Its a waste of a spot on the bench. To get the most out of the thin squad we have, the game time should be shared around. If the replacements are considered good enough to trust with 15 mins in the middle of the game, then you need to get someone better in to fill the position

Quite. You're not expecting to get an argument out of me there.

The weekly meeting between CEO and Coach should be interesting this week.

To throw a spanner into the works of those claiming it will be another Saints V Leeds semi final, Saints would most likely choose Leeds in week 3 if both won through, which would mean no Saints v Leeds final as one of us would have been KO'd the week before it.

I'd suggest Leeds might avoid this game if you finished top, but I don't think Saints are particularly looking forward to playing Leeds at OT again.

The score from the Grand Final qualifier between the two at Knowsley Road in recent years is 2 - 1 to Saints.

Leeds could (key injuries and on form) be the weakest of the last four if they get there so I don't see why Saints wouldn't choose to play them in that case.

It may even be a game Leeds could get up for, especially if it's wet.

My understanding is that Saints can chose which qualifier to play, they cannot choose thr other team that automatically qualified therefore they will not be able to choose Leeds if both teams automatically qualify for round 3.

Eamonn McManus confirmed to one of our fans on Saturday that if we finish top we can pick any of the remaining teams to play


[url=http://www.redvee.net/readarticle.php?article_id=8484th Paragraph[/url

That there seems to be such widespread confusion about how this silly system works speaks volumes about how barmy it really is..................

Thats how I thought they system worked with the highest remaining team being able to pick [ianyone[/i remaining

Thats what I thought but as has been said it has never exactly been clear, does seem a very strange system!

We haven't secured second as yet and neither have Saints secured 1st there may well be a few twists and turns before we're done.

Huddersfield for league leaders hubcap anybody? Who'd a thunk that might ever become even a vague possibility!!

It's very unlikely. I can't see Leeds losing again and Saints won't lose more than 2 (Wigan and Leeds).

Cough - someone on here received some mild ridicule over suggesting such a vague possibility earlier in the season.

assuming saints and leeds both finish top 2 with saints top and they both win their first fixtures, who's to say who saints will pick.

People seem to think they'll pick us to avoid playing us at old trafford but that would be a risky strategy on their part. Imagine the motivation it would give us and KR isn't exactly a bogey ground, we often give saints a good game there.

No, i suspect they'd want to actually beat us at old trafford if they were to play us. Most likely they'd pick the lowest ranked team or ''worst'' team and give themselves the easiest chance of making old trafford, then after that whatever will be will be.

To pick us simply to avoid potentially playing us at old trafford is almost an admission they can't beat us there, an admission their pride wouldn't allow.

I think saints will finish top on points difference. You're going to get top spot by the skin of your teeth AGAIN.

That might still be against Leeds anyway.

The schedule at the bottom of [url=http://www.superleague.co.uk/page.php?id=360this page[/url suggests that the choice is limited to one of the two preliminary semi-final winners but this obviously needs clarification.

Also [url=http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12198_5004407,00.htmlHere[/url it says "It is in week three where the coach's choice element comes into play. The highest placed team remaining in the competition will get to choose their opponents from the winners of week two."

St Helens chairman in not understanding the RFL rules shocker.

That looks like a standard phrase that can be used where you can switch between chairman/coach/player/referee

Sorry I forgot fans as well