No, of course not. We let in how many tries in 30 minutes? Our defence was impeccable, clearly. Don't be so daft. Of course there was lack of effort - at the very least, there was a lack of defensive effort. Either that or we once again totally failed to deal with kicks. In which case, Potter had better get off his butt and teach the lads how to deal with kicks. Isn't that the kind of thing coaches do? Teach stuff to players?

I've very little respect for Potter and his bland statements. Give me some honesty any day of the week.

It's funny how you jump from him being a great coach one week and rubbish the next. Every team loses, no matter who the coach. You weren't saying you can't wait to get rid after Murrayfeild were you?

I've not said anything about Potter this season at all.* So I don't know what you're talking about.

I will say, though, that I'm glad he is going.

*Edited to add: since the first Hull match. I've been on the fence about him since then but since he's declared he is going, I am happy with that declaration.

It wasn't aimed at you directly, it just seems week to week similar people are begging for him to leave, yet when you win by 50+ points, he doesn't really get praised. Your in the Semi's of the challenge cup and 3rd in the League, hardly seems that bad a coach.

You didn't go to the game, you're listening/reading reports, so you don't know exactly what happened, and neither do i, therefore you can't say there was a lack of effort. From what various people have said, Hull pinned us in our half late in the game, and had a lot of sets in our half, causing us to do a lot of defending, this will lead to missed tackles, it doesn't mean we lacked effort or that we couldn't be bothered.

Definition of Effort: The use of physical or mental energy to do something;

Its not difficult to understand that it might not have been down to effort, maybe Hull just got the momentum and we struggled to cope and were much more tired. After all, they had an extra weekend rest on us, after we had a tough game against Barrow last weekend. Just because Hull came from 20 points down to beat us, doesn't mean it was down to us lacking effort. We might have put as much effort in as possible, but when a team gets all the momentum and gets on top, then teams struggle to cope with that, and its obvious by the reports that Hull had all the momentum in the final 20 minutes, hence they came back to snatch the game. It does not mean that we couldn't be bothered and just gave up, it means that Hull got the bounce of the ball and got the momentum behind them, and we are often the side that has that momentum and teams can't cope, in this instance it sounds as if it was the other way around, it happens. Deal with it, or maybe not, just blame Potter.

I'm not Potters biggest fan, in-fact, i'm not a fan of his at all, and i wasn't at the game and i haven't seen the game so i'm not going to kick off over his tactics or anything else, just yet anyway. What Potter has said could very well be true, but i wasn't there so i don't know and neither was you, so you don't know either.

Are you saying that going from 26-6 up 8 minutes into the second half (when Hull scored the first of their multiple tries) and then losing by one point, not having scored another try, is a great defensive effort? Well, I don't. I think that is a poor defensive effort. And what I'm saying is that I would have respected Potter more for saying how it is rather than giving some bland statement about effort. Clearly we were poor defensively in the second half. That is crystal clear since we leaked tries. Not being at the game doesn't make a jot of difference to what is actually a fact. We leaked tries in the second half. Therefore, our defence was not up to it.

Secondly, is Fozzard injured? Is Emmitt injured? Why did Graham play 80 minutes? Was Potter experimenting for this match or did he just decide that we can beat a massive Hull side with one prop on the bench, assuming that report was true?

It obviously wasn't good defence, because we leaked trys, but there might have been reasons for that, and because you wasn't at the game, you obviously don't know the reasons, therefore it does make a difference. A few people have said that Hull had all the possession and had plenty of sets in our half, therefore with that much possession and pressure, your defence is always going to tire, that doesn't mean that the lads didn't put any effort in, but if you want to find any reasons to have a go at Potter then carry on. It is a fact that we leaked trys, correct, however, it is not fact that the lads didn't put the effort in. It might have been poor defence, or it might have simply been that Hull had the momentum and due to all the pressure put on us in the final 20 minutes, we tired quicker than they did, hence that then led to us leaking a trys. It is a very stupid comment to say 'it doesn't make jot' if you wasn't there, as you don't know the circumstances as to why we leaked trys, but it doesn't mean it was down to a lack of effort from the lads. Sometimes you can put in the effort.

Fozzard was on the bench, so he wasn't injured, don't know about Emmitt.

'Saint Billy' is much more on the money with his assumptions than you are.

RL is a game where if you keep scoring or forcing drop outs the opposition simply doesn't get the ball. That's what happened to Saints in the 2nd half, they barely touched the ball and when they did they were starting from the in-goal area or behind the 20metre line. To have to keep defending so many sets and then drive the ball up from so deep is tiring, and Saints simply tired more quickly than Hull.

Yes! There was! But at the end of the day it doesn't bloody matter! We gave away a 26-6 lead in 30 bloody minutes! And Potter is pleased with the effort! Man. Short of losing half our team to injury, there really isn't any excuse for that.

No he isn't. He isn't making assumptions. Nor am I for that matter. I'm going on the scoreline, which shows we lost a commanding lead in 30 minutes. That's a fact. It really doesn't matter how we did it. We shouldn't have done it but we did.

if you'd rather base your ideas on what you've read than that's fine, I prefer to actually attend or at least see the highlights of games before jumping to conclusions.

There is an attitude problem, just like there was at Salford. The fact is (injuries or not) that team should be putting 40 plus on a team like Hull, and would have if they didn't let their performance dip. Is that down to the coach? Possibly, but at the end of the day it's the players themselves that need to take a look in the mirror after games like this.

A different team came out for the second half, and that isn't on.

Still, it doesn't mean Potter is wrong when he says that he is pleased with the effort. Teams concede points when they are tired, and by all accounts Saints had to put up with a lot of pressure, and they tired, Hull scored 21 points in this time, it happens, but it does not mean that there was a lack of effort. It could well mean Hull had all the momentum and Saints tired late in the game due to the amount of defensive work they had to do.

And we don't actually have to be at the match to know this, do we? It's all in the scoreline. Or more accurately, the rapid change in scoreline.

How many away games could you have said that about SaintsFan this season.
But I'll tell you what, if by some luck stroke Saints get to Wembley, no doubt she'll be there.

That Potter was pleased with the effort in giving away a 26-6 lead in 30 minutes says enough about Potter for me, to be honest. Sooner he goes the better IMO.


All teams have to do that. Hull had to do it in the first half and look what happened to them? They won. No excuses for me. That same team beat Leeds beautifully and beat Hull KR convincingly twice. Sorry, but the team were poor and the coach is poor for saying he is happy with their effort. I've nothing more to add to that really.

Nope. I won't be able to afford that either. I'll be unemployed or at the very best earning the minimum wage. If I'm lucky.

So go take the pi$$ elsewhere.

Your talking to someone who was on £3 a week, and still managed to attend games.
Now that is taking the pi$$.

'should be putting 40 plus on a team like Hull' how patronising! you are aware we had already beaten you this season? we're not exactly propping up the table this year either.

The team wasn't the same as the one that played Leeds. We had more key forwards available when we played Leeds than we did against Hull.

Hull had to do that in the first half, and they tired quicker than us, and conceded a lot of points in the process as we had the momentum and the pressure was being put on them. The second half the opposite happened and they had the momentum, hence we tired quicker and they put the pressure on, scoring a similar amount of points that we did in the first half. It happens, it doesn't mean there was a lack of effort.

I don't know how you can say that we should be putting 40 points on a team like Hull, especially with the injuries that we have. Many people expected us to get beat quite comfortably tonight, never mind having blew a good chance to win the game. Hull are 4th in the league (and were before tonight), on top of that we have many key players out injured, so i don't really know how you can say we should be sticking 40 points on Hull, Salford, maybe, but not Hull. Maybe at full strength we should be beating them quite comfortably, but even then at Hull, we wouldn't get it all our own way, but i would back us to win by maybe 20-30 points.

Maybe the 20 in the first half was an indication?

Like i've said mate, different circumstances arise. I don't know exactly what happened as i wasn't able to make the game, however, it sounds as though we had all the possession and put all the pressure on in the first half, and the in the second half, it was the opposite, these things happen. We could well have been lucky to get those 20 points, doesn't mean we deserved to be the 20 points up.

I fail to see how you can expect an injury hit side to stick 40 points on a team away from home that is placed 4th in the league. It sounds as though we had a good spell in the game in the first half, and the roles reversed in the second half. Hopefully, a lot of the young players will learn from this experience and learn how to close the game out. I'm just making assumptions really, as i wasn't at the game, but you can't surely expect 3rd placed in the league to beat 4th placed by 40 points (away) at full strength, never mind with a lengthy injury list.

You might have thrown a lead away but it wasn't a case of you going to pieces. 26-6 didn't reflect how the game had gone up to that point. We just started to get more posession and stopped giving away penalties and this changed the game.

Red button told you that as well did it?

You lot just can't get used to not winning every week. Super league is evening out and most sides are going to get beat regularly. Get used to it or go back to what you used to do before you became glory supporters