they are better ratings, Roby, Foster and Graham were your best I thought.

Graham tried hard and kept going but your pack smashed him every time.

because he was the only one who showed up.

Maybe but it was when you moved the ball to our left that won the game.

It's not often jammer gets owned like he did last night so can't be to harsh on him.

Owned wait till the Aussies get hold of him.

"Owned"

Are you 12?

11 TEEN.

Roby and Tony P were the top yardage makers in the match after Tomkins.

Maybe he was hiding that much the Wigan defence didn't notice when he snuck past them?

I thought Tony P had a terrible game on Saturday (along with most of the team, obviously).

I didn't think we were as bad as people are making out, but Wigan were exceptional and never allowed us into the game.

We were missing our two first choice half backs and played like we did. Missing Eastmond and Pryce cannot be underestimated, whilst I do not think it would have guaranteed a win, we'd have been in with a chance of winning with five minutes left IMO. The pack was fighting a losing battle because of this, with Wigan picking up possession in far better positions than we did and there was also us making mistakes that cost us, and handed them, tries.

I know you have a bit of a thing for him, but Smith for me showed why we were correct in letting him go. He had an very good game against Wire, but was little better than average against Huddersfield and was worse on Saturday. His kicking game was poor and he offered nothing with ball in hand. We looked better when Lomax moved more centrally and Roby came on as we finally gave their defence something to think about.

Wigan's defence was intense, and we didn't have the players to stretch that, they did in Tomkins at full back and while we were reduced to one on one tackles allowing them to get quick ptb, they were getting 3 men into each tackle.

Take two of Tomkins and Leuluai or Deacon out of their side and it would have been far closer.

Don't be silly.


Well, I knew that Saints fans would be on his case if he didn't live up to the expectations he set for himself against Warrington. HOwever, I think you are being entirely unfair to him in your judgment. The only criticism that can be levelled at him was he had a poor first half kicking game, when Wigan were in his faces. Something, it can be noted, that was not true in the reverse. Unlike against Warrington, our forwards were not in Wigan's faces, not setting a platform for him or the backs as a whole to perform. Also, that was his first derby and his first Grand Final and he had been training for four weeks. He was inexperienced and also it is highly likely Potter will have told him exactly what he wanted him to do, in that marvellous gameplan he had going there in the first half.


Well, he made the break for Dixon's try and passed in field for Meli's try and would have created a try for Wilkin had Wilkin been able to hold on to the ball. In the second half he also took on the line (I couldn't see whether he did in the first half) and he defended like mad. So I'm not sure what you mean by offering nothing with ball in hand.


Well of course we did. Lomax is a stand off and so Smith would then have had a halfback partner who could play as a halfback. But that is Potter's responsibility, not Smith's fault. He can only play with the team on the field and if the team on the field is not structured well or not playing well (and both were the case) then he can only try his best, which he did. Under the circumstances - all the circumstances - I think he did as well as any inexperienced halfback could.

I didn't mean sexually, and your following defence of him proves it





Warrington's defence is nowhere near as good as Wigan's, to blame it solely on our packs performance is to discredit the opposition. I accept that he is inexperienced, and I didn't expect a match winning performance from him, what I did expect was a decent long kicking game. That didn't happen, I'm pretty sure that Potter didn't tell him to put the Wigan defence under no pressure with any of his kicks. He didn't have the quality to turn the game round, which at scrum half he is pretty much expected to do.

He's a competant scrum half and that's it, I hope he does well at Salford, but I find it unlikely that he will be playing in a GF again. Salford won't get there and no one bigger will sign him.



That was created after another throee or four passes and a cross field run by Wilkin.



Him and a number of others, iirc.



Problem with that is that Wilkin was the dummy runner and had he selected the correct ball, to Wellens behind Wilkin, we had a three man overlap. Wellens went ape at him, correctly. A better scrum half would have seen that pass, almost everyone else did.



He took on the line with little effect, and not very often, hence me saying he offered little with ball in hand. He wasn't a threat to the Wigan defence with the ball in hand.



The team looked better, Smith did not.



He did as well as any player with his experience and talent would have done, that's my point. I'd back that Eastmond had he been fit would have done a better job.

I've only watched the game in detail (peace) again today. I hadn't realised just how bad that Matty Smith pass (decision) to Wilkin was. Any decent half back (or indeed a Sinfield / O'Loughlin type loose forward) would have had the vision to miss out Wilkin and give Saints a three on one overlap.

But he still made the initial break. Most tries are scored as a result of multiple hands, same as the next one I cited. But someone has to start the ball rolling just as someone has to finish it off.


Ironic that he did, really, given that he failed to notice a free man on his right and instead passed to his left to give away a certain try himself! I don't like it when Wello blasts inexperienced players just because he's frustrated that we are losing. But there is a sense of justice when he then goes and does something stupid himself.


The team looked livelier; no better though. They still dropped balls, gave away penalties, defended poorly, etc. They just did it in a livelier manner.

I'll leave it there though as I'm not going to get dragged into another argument with you. I found the whole performance upsetting enough as it is without listening to one of the least experienced lads on the pitch getting pilloried for what was a dismal display by everyone (to varying degrees), including our dumb former coach.

What's with the Matty Smith loving? Let if go for gods sake! He is not good enough.

You haven't exactly proven yourself an authority on here! However, as you will note if you read my post, I don't want to discuss it any further.

I'm with you on most of this (as I am with most of your views on HP).

The pass to wilkin was a mistake, but as much wilkins mistake as smiths. I'm not totally convinced wilikin meant to be a dummy runner. As a dummy runner I wouldn't have thought you would block your own players line of sight for passing. Certainly when I was watching it, me and 5000 other fans around me thought wilikin had dropped a perfectly good pass which should have led to a certain try.

Smith did knock on with the try line at his mercy but most of the team also did!!

You and 5000 other fans aren't good enough to play scrum half for us either

(I was one of them until I saw a replay.)

I'm not blaming Smith for the defeat, he didn't perform excellently, but then I don't think anyone really expected him to. He just showed that he isn't good enough to play for a team challenging for honours at this moment in time.

So because he didn't do what Longy failed to do for three consecutive years, he isn't good enough to play for a team challenging for honours? Was Longy not good enough for Saints either then? By your reasoning he wasn't because he didn't perform 'excellently' at any of the previous three Grand Finals. So I suppose it must always be the scrum half's fault if we lose a match. I must remember that next season, should Kyle not have a good day in a big match!

I think it's really unfair to blame the inexperienced players for our performance on Saturday night. The responsibility for that shambles lies with our experienced players, of which we had many and most of whom gave a poor to dismal performance.

I would agree. Also, when coaching juniors, it is instilled into them always to be ready for the ball. So whether Wilkin was the dummy runner or not - and like you, I'm not convinced - he should still have been ready to collect the ball. I don't go with the 'not ready' excuse at any time. All players should be alert to the ball at all times.


He did and I felt for him. But as you say he wasn't the only one. Keiron finished his career off beautifully with a knock on. Paul Wellens effectively passed to a Wigan player with the line at his mercy. Tony P disappeared up his own jumper. Meli gave away two penalties. The whole team was a shambles. It still amazes me that we weren't nilled.

Ididn't think you were talking to me anymore on this topic?



Long wasn't fit in 07 and was past it in 09. As I've said I don't blame Smith for the defeat, however he is limited player in what he offers for me and the promised solid kicking game never appeared. What the game confirmed for me is that he doesn't offer enough beyond his kicking game to be kept on at this moment in time

after the wire game you was all saying it was a mistake letting smith go then he has 1 bad game and you slate him real bad sore losers

The people who were saying that still think that in the main, the people who weren't still aren't.

You signed a decent scrum half, but that's all he is and as a club looking to challenge for more trophies than Salford are, IMO, we need more than that.