In an attempt to make yourself sound intelligent and knowledgable with your comments about the human brain and "survival instinct" you are actually making yourself sound ridiculous.

I personally endured the exact same injury as Walsh once upon a time and I went on to play for years afterwards, not once shirking the responsibility to take the ball in and get hit. Before you think about mentioning the difference in playing standard, that's completely irrelevant seeing as it's supposedly "survival instinct" programmed into all humans.

There have been countless professionals who have broken arms and legs within a contact sport such as football or rugby and gone on to play again without avoiding contact.

To suggest that Walsh is merely acting as a human being is programmed to is complete and utter nonsense. It's another example of your apologist nature over the last few weeks.

Stop making excuses for people and stop trying to ram your head in the sand naivety down our throats.

No doubt you'll respond one paragraph at a time with an array of long words and superfluous language, but it won't change the fact that you are talking garbage.

I actually came back from broken/dislocated ankle at the same time as Walsh did from his injury. Mine wasn't as bad as Walsh but I didn't play for 8 month with it so in my own way was in the same boat as Luke.

It took me a whole 5 mins to get back into it and Over the fear. I wing lie, I was crapping myself before the game but I just thought stuff it and took the ball in the first opportunity I got and then didn't look back.

On the contrary - there really is nothing to reply to. You are having a big baby spat over the fact that I pointed out a phenomenon whose demonstrable truth can be verified by the countless number of professional players in ALL sports who have talked at length about regaining confidence after a bad injury. The fact that Luke Walsh doesn't possess your Rambo-esque psychology proves little more than the fact that you aren't Luke Walsh. Who would have believed that?



How do I know Luke Walsh isn't just lazy instead? By the simple fact that he had no problems attacking the line BEFORE he got injured. Of course it's POSSIBLE he could have suddenly become lazy overnight for inexplicable reasons. But I think most people whose ears aren't separated by empty space will realise it isn't PROBABLE.

Now, you can stomp your feet and gnash your teeth and shout "Apologist" until you are blue in the face. None of these facts are going away. Personally I think your behavior is pretty comical. But maybe that's just my twisted sense of humour.

For what it's worth to you this is Rovers worst team in superleague with 3 forwards playing 6,7, and 9 for an hour and a host of others injured.
I watched the worst Saints team I've seen carried over the line by Roby. Terrible predictable attack, shocking marker defence I could go on.
Burns and Walsh look bad influences.
We will finish bottom 2.
You need to sort yourselves out or you'll challenge for nothing.

We won a Grand Final with a forward at 7, but that was only because the other forward who'd been playing 7 got injured

Good to see the usual brain dead penalties being conceded by the usual brain dead players too. LMS will be the death of my TV one day.

The word 'predictable' is best and most apt adjective that encapsulates everything DIRE about Saints at the moment.
Eminently unwatchable,the entertainers tab has never be so incongruous as it is now.
The current system makes Royce simmons look positivley flamboyent and debonair.

No doubt about, we are the worst team in super league to watch. It's so boring it's unreal and his excuse of the salary cap causing this is a joke. Hull, cas, Salford, Hull KR all supposed to be lower teams to us yet they play good rugby.

I just don't think KC has the experience or rugby brain to have us play free flowing rugby. Tbe only move we do is a drop off pass and that's dire for a pro club.

I'm already dreading his contract extension. He's absolutely stealing a living.

Any idea why we are not using Sean Long's attacking experience or is he in the "one for the future outsider camp" alongside Fages.

I know it's not been up to standard, but we are 3 games into the season and we have won more than we have lost.
Lets not go OTT.

LMS was getting praise off fans last year for his efforts, the possibility of Savelio going to Warrington had saddened and other fans beside themselves in indignation, swift was a possible for being shown the door, Burns was great in his first 7 games and was going to be even better when Walsh came back. Wilkin was a saviour carrying the club when we had no halves etc etc.

You can't buy and sell players week to week like some fans would want (ps fans also at the same time want commitment and loyalty from these very same players)

Now LMS is a waste of contract, Savelio was over hyped (by whom??), Swift is the new Tommy Makinson and can do no wrong where as Tommy is maybe not what we need.

I'm all for wanting better quality and better results, if someone has had a dire game (ie Walsh v Salford) then yes we want to give them grief, but the way we react you would think we are playing this as a computer game where if it's not going well you can simply restart all over again.

Players have bad games and some times a run of bad games and deserve to be dropped, but the league is not won or lost in the opening 3 games.

As fans we seem to be very negative about the team, plenty of posts pre-match and post match if there is criticism to be given. But if there has been a win, like against Huddersfield the boards and threads go very quiet, both here and on Redvee.

Are Saints fans on these boards the new prawn sandwich brigade? I think it was mentioned elsewhere that we are living in the past, constantly harping back to some glory years. But even in those years we got turned over by the likes of Hull and Salford. People just forget the bad losses.

We was boring as hell last year to don't forget. You can get away with be boring if you want trophies like Hanley did but if you play boring one up rugby and don't win, then your in trouble.

Seeing as you picked up on my LMS comment, I've been consistent with my opinion on him. That has changed because of one or two games; I've never really rated him and I think he's a liability.

To be honest I think LMS was pretty good for most of all last season despite having to play in loads of different positions, thought he had a reasonable effort against the Roosters this season. Obviously discipline is his biggest liability, I think this is also down to the coach we were the second worse team for giving penalties away last season and I'm not seeing much improvement this season either, same old offenders and LMS again being one of them, the coaching need to sort it out.

What does not having a rugby brain mean in this context? On the face of it, it's an odd description of a man who's made a living at the top end of RL in this country for more than two decades.

One of the criticisms of our performance v KR was that some of our tries came from kicks. Why is that? Do we now revise our opinion of our win against Bradford in the cup final in 1996? That win, I seem to recall, was based on Goulding's kicking.

KC might or might not make it as a coach who delivers trophies, and he might, or might not, deliver 'entertaining' rugby (whatever that means), but some of the accusations against him are baffling.

I picked up on a few different comments from across a variety of boards, it was not aimed at having a go at anyone specifically.
My point is more around the venom which we seem to be laying into the team gets earlier and earlier each year.
Only 2 years ago we were champions
last year we came close in 2 semi's and probably would have made the final if it was not for one player in sinfield.

The other point is we seem keen to be harsh on the team but after a good win against Huddersfield who people were tipping to beat us before a ball was kicked, there is a smattering of praise before the doom and gloom sets in about the next match.

It's a forlorn hope and I'm as guilty as anyone, but I just wish we could be a bit more positive as a set of fans.

We was boring as hell last year to don't forget. You can get away with be boring if you want trophies like Hanley did but if you play boring one up rugby and don't win, then your in trouble.

OK. His tactics are same every week, we play one up boring rugby no matter who we play . We have no set plays, we have no structure and lack ideas which comes down to coaching.

Doing it in the pitch following Instructions from very clever coaches like Anderson and Millward like KC did is much harder to put these plays and structure in place as the coach has to.

Thank you; that's much clearer.

It's one thing carrying out instructions thought out by your coach but it's a totally different ball game getting your players to carry out your instructions etc