I meant in Game 1. This game was just like that game in a number of ways - notably poor attack from both sides. Widnes was a week before the WCC, and we did defend pretty well for most of the match vs the Cowboys. My worry is that last year we failed miserably to show any kind of defensive mettle once it became clear we'd struggle in attack, and I don't see how that will change if we can't start to score points.

Slagging Mags & Burrow?
Hmmm they were criticised where it was warranted & it in no way was a reflection on their careers or past performances & if you actually look back Sinfield did the organising with Mags/Burrow playing off the back of that whilst also not forgetting Burrows best performances have been at 9 or off the bench at 9 since 2008 so no thanks you stick to the spreadsheets.
As for "refusing" to see a lack of consistency in Sutty at 6 if he's not performed ive said as such just as i did earlier in the thread whereas you'd have us believe he was the worst player on the pitch & we'd have won comfortably without him yet you failed to even acknowledge Burrows short comings tonight nor the use of the bench & poor team discipline.

The massive and key difference tonight was we looked fit. So many times last year after 20 mins we looked gassed, that didn't look like the case at all tonight. We do look fit, that is encouraging.

I agree with this our energy levels especially defensively were 100% better than the 1st game v Wire.
I also think our Defensive shape looked stronger.

We don't look like we'll concede anywhere near the same amount as last year. That alone will jump us up the table even if the attack can't improve on last year.

Thought Bentham shared the whistle quite well to be honest.Saints defensively better in the end.Poor attack from both sides,halves never really in the game due to light packs.

Only watched on my phone from airport, so not the best view. Thought it was what you would expect first game, close and rusty.

Time will tell if anything has changed, not the first game, but it was poor how much ball we had and how little threat we were. At least some positives can be taken. But negatives, the stupid decision from the coach to over rule his captains thoughts in going for the two before half time. And the completely wasteless time spent on continually picking Sutcliffe at six, who just does not cut it at this level.

But next couple of games will tell us more about this team than last night. Last night for me was better than expected.

I've said for ages sutty is a 13. good in defence, he can bulk up a bit and has good hands.
again, like plenty of others I said a top half back was needed. had we had one last night we would have won by 18. saints were woeful. there for the taking.
the wrong option was taken nearly every time.
when fages is the best half back on the pitch you know you have massive problems.
and where are all the golding haters this morning?

Golding was great defensively but you've got to admit he offers very little in attack, far too often runs sideways and can't seem to beat the first man.

Did anyone else get really annoyed at how willing Saints seemed to be to give a penalty away on their own line or after a break/half break?

I seem to remember them doing it a lot last year and while you could say they're backing their defence it's just a really cynical play.

I was really pleased that at long last the refs are going to clamp down on players moving off the mark to play the ball. Warrington in particular will suffer if this is enforced.

I had no complaints when Jimmy was penalised immediately after a Saints player was

Both teams are very poor, You can both look forward to fighting it out in the middle 8s.

We lost by just 2 points because Saints converted their try and we did not. In the first half we had enough of the ball in good attacking positions to turn pressure into winning scores. You have to admit the main culprit was Sutcliffe who kept squandering chances with poor decisions and finishes as more than not he had the ball for the last plays. IMO he was the worst player last night does not have the skill set to play as an organising half back and he does not have the pace to play as a running half back either. I do not see him as a 13 either as he lacks the physicality and has not shown a good offloading game yet so would just jam up the works when he gets the ball. This does not make him a bad player and I had thought he may make a but he looks to me now more like a utility reserve squad member at best.

Over the years when I was coaching you would see big lads stand out in a team because they were bigger for their age than the rest but often as they grew older they still relied on size and did not develop the subtler skills sufficiently. Sutty maybe one of those because he was regarded as such a good prospect when he was an academy player. He may well just be a slow developer but I have my doubts given the number of chances he has had. These are just my opinions and I hope I am proven to be wrong.

I disagree with you with regard to Burrow last night. I thought he had a good game and always looked a threat. He and Mags are coming to the end of their playing careers but still have the skill set to turn a game something I have yet to see in Sutty. They are the best we have got followed by Lilley at present and until we recruit

I agree about Sutcliffe, the more you see of him the more he looks less of a half and more of a grafter. He is clearly a good rugby player, but i feel blindly sticking by him now in the halves could be detrimental to his career. I would say possibly 13 will end up being his position or even centre with his good hands and show and go?

Golding was a plus. Still his size is an issue (but what can we do for now?) bringing the ball back he gets turtled for no yards most of the time, but we do have to stick by him and let him grow into the role now.

Like I said previously Sutcliffe is not a HB.
I too would prefer to see him at 13 but that depends how the coach wants us to play.
Do we go for the ball handling LF or do we go for the strength and power most teams go for our coach included.
If that is the case Sutty cannot play at 13 either.
JJB for me did enough at LF to keep his place.
If McGuire returns Sutcliffe drops out of the 17.
But with McGuire, Burrow and Parcell along with Golding at FB we do look light and the centres are going to have to do much more tackling which nullifies their attacking skills.
Golding for me is solid enough at the back. He might not break through tackles but he does have the pace in broken play to grab us a try or two.

We'll agree to disagree re-Burrow his decision making as Captain was poor re-penalties & his last tackle efforts were just as poor wrt his kicking game.
As for looking a threat how many breaks did he make or create?
HB is a partnership & neither were great last night plus the Coach taking Parcell off & leaving us with Moon/Sutty after releasing Lilley on loan is at best bizzarre.

I'm not one for bagging players but I completely agree. Can see him being shipped out to Salford or Widnes before long. Hope McGuire's back soon, we'd have won last night if he played.

Not a great game but I'd have taken a 2 point loss before kick off so no real complaints.
Big positives - Golding & Parcell who could have huge seasons for us.

From a neutral point of view it's quite enjoyed the game.
St Helens have a nack of not attempting to move away at the play the ball so slow the game down ,
I thought burrows still sees a gap in defence but unfortunately looks to have lost that zip however saints defended his attempts well.
For the first game of the season a reasonable start by both teams.

An Interesting game - bloody cold mind you.

My thoughts:
The lack of attacking structure/plays of 2016 were evident once again as was the inability to get the ball to the most incisive attacking player we have in Watkins.

Golding was very good in defence but offered very little in attack hopefully this will come as his confidence builds.

The half backs were a shambles - Sutcliffe just looks out of depth at this point and Burrow looks like player nearing the end of an illustrious career.

On the forwards what do Ablett and JJB now offer in attack - every time they got the ball they killed the play, it will be interesting to see who makes way for Ferres?

On the props Garbutt was excellent but Cuthbertson looks more like the 2016 version than the 2015 version and Singleton looks too lightweight at this level.

On a positive Parcell looked lively and Ward was solid

On a negative the substitutions were simply bizarre once again.

Saints were poor and should have been soundly beaten - very similar to the opening game of last season dominated for long periods of the game but couldn't score enough points. Unless Leeds find a way to increase their scoring this could be another very tough season.

I agree, I've honestly never understood the hype about the lad but this is one of the things that happens with academy lads when people have connections to them or the club they came from.

I recall his debut in 2013, he was still yet to come on after 50 mins and the guy behind me ranted to his mate "Sutcliffe's the best player at the whole club, why isn't McDermott brining him on the idiot".....that was 2013 before he's even played a game and with the likes of Sinfield, Peacock, Hall etc. at the club. Just ridiculous.

To be fair it was Ablett who made our only try. Abysmal last play options and execution , clueless attack in general with all the opportunities we got given in that first half, and it's not the fact we didn't score it's that we didn't look like doing so and it is very worrying moving forward. We still look a threat as always from deep, and that is where most of our best looks at the try line came last night. Other than that there were some positives already highlighted. Lets see how we get on next week, hopefully McGuire is back.

Bet Wigan are glad Charnley has gone,every play the ball he always took 2 paces forward.......O sorry most Wigan players move off the mark.

See Mcguire getting mentioned again what exactly did he "change" last year when he returned?

That's not true though. Sutcliffe was never a top player as a kid, and he never stood out in the academy either. It is something from that the coaches have seen to work with, and the hype came from the first team appearances. For me I never understood what they saw in him. A game lad with good hands, but it ends there.

have to say if that refereeing sets the standard for this season then no complaints from me, massive improvement on last year, and penalized for moving of the mark fair call. the ruck speed was just about right as well, and the game moved along at a fine pace, despite the low score line. keep up the good work.