You've gotta take into account the squads at the coaches' disposal though. Someone like Betts has done well with what he's got and Widnes often punch above their weight, and what Powell has done at Cas is brilliant. Are we fulfilling our potential? We have the 2nd best squad in the league IMO but we often look not as good as Wigan and it wouldn't surprise me to see them get to the grand final instead of us.

In theory we are the second best squad on paper but we have had long spells with a very long injury list causing quite a lot of disruption more than other teams. We,ve been ticking over in the 1st 3 for most of the season now, I don,t think any of the other coaches would have improved us position wise.

Leeds obviously are hitting top form at the moment but can they keep this going for 2 months, Saints were pretty decent form wise in the first 5 games, if we can return that level in the last 4 games then we are pretty much back on the bike.


PS. where is Mugwump, is he going to hit us with a "War and Peace" version of opinion.

He's probably on some Australian cricket forum telling them they can still win the ashes.

I read statements like this on here regularly but what does this actually mean? Whenever I see these statements my immediate reaction is 'Says who?'

I think one of our biggest problems is that Cunningham's hero status makes him almost unsackable.

He's been writing his post since 7pm Saturday night trying to list as many injuries as possible and how much harder it is to play against 12 men than 13.

You think results this year make him sackable???

Semi final and 3 points off top, with 6 games to go.

Hardly what you would call sackable status.

Its usually the sky pundits isn't it, don't think these days saints fans take much notice of it due to our regular annual injury crisis negates it.

With Cunningham there is always going to be a transitional period between retired legendary hero to an experienced proven coach. He started off well early season but this was very much based on a team with few injuries hitting a bit of form and still influenced by the Brown effect of last season.
Second part of this season both coach and players are struggling for performance consistency, KC has not got big game coaching experience yet, so I don't know why people moan so much about it, if he gets us in the top 4 then he's done a reasonable job in his first season as coach.

I had nightmares about the Catalans performance last night. Just the wrong time of the season to have your pack exhausted and your form capitulating.

It's a good job we weren't good enough to reach the CC Final. I reckon we'd have lost that to KR had we got there.

To coach at Saints there's usually 2 targets you must meet with the fans but obviously only 1 target with McManus.

First target is to win trophies or be within a game or two of doing so. On paper that's great and I imagine when fans from other clubs look at these boards they're baffled when we talk of sacking coaches when we're sat near the top of the table. And that's because of target 2 which is to entertain and play the game the right way. When we weren't winning much (pre 1996) we were playing really good rugby and although it was frustrating not being able to push Wigan off their pedestal, we were at least proud of the fact we played entertaining rugby. Then post 1996, we started winning stuff and playing great rugby and us Saints fans ended up spoilt rotten.

It seems that Cunningham, a club legend, is a McManus man. He's his boss so I guess that's obvious. However that means he's only interested in getting us in a position to compete for trophies and thus playing 'safe, conservative, take no risks' rugby to achieve this. Which doesn't meet the criteria of the fans.

Saints have got the players to play expansive rugby. The try against Warrington from deep is just one example of that. I hope as time goes on and Cunningham gets more experience, that he becomes more confident and trusting to let his team off the leash a bit.

That's an excellent assessment. Winning is obviously the foremost aim of any sports organization but it's a shame we've so willingly cast aside our ethos as a flamboyant team who likes to play fast and take risks. And even more disappointing that others (particularly Leeds) have seemed to take this mantle. It's something we're known and respected for throughout the game and should always be part of our DNA. It might be a misty-eyed romantic view but when you're going through the turnstiles for 15 home games, I'd rather watch flamboyant, exciting rugby every week than 'win at all costs' error-free percentage stuff, even if it occasionally costs us points.

Conservative was one of the (many) accusations levelled at McDermott. He seems to have let our team off the leash but it certainly wasn't an overnight process.

My thoughts exactly, its a pity some of the usual fans don,t see it that way and have little faith in what could be achieved, its about this time last year the "usual suspects" came on board saying we will struggle to make the top 5, won't get to a grand final never mind winning one. Brown found a way of adapting to the cards he was dealt with.
This season is harder because the coaching staff are here 12 months too soon, every club benefits from stability which takes time, but some fans want a quick fix to success. (a la Salford)

That Dawson 'effort' just about summed up our night. Possibly the most embarrassing thing I've ever seen on a Rugby field. You could have drove a London bus through the gap he had to score, the fool didn't need to dive.

At least another 2 season ahead of him into the bargain.

There is a real danger Saints will be swallowed up by three or four teams. Leeds are comfortably better, Wigan will be next season, Wire and Huddersfield potentially too if their recruitment pays off.

It's not just the lack of strike players, poor halves and awful backs holding us back. We're playing the game like London Broncos did at the beginning of Super League. Boring, percentage based RL that is easily beaten if you can get a lead. Leeds have changed the game, the quick play the balls, the determination to offload not tuck and drive like we do and the ability to throw it wide with fantastic core skills. We're behind technically as much as we are in terms of players.

Our tactics current are:
1 - Winger runs across pitch and skids into the knees of defender
2 - Hit up by Walmsley/Amor against a rampant defense
3 - Hit up by Walmsley/Amor/backrower
4 - Kick to opposition fullback by Walsh

The wingers and Quinlan need to do more to get us going, either by hurtling into the line or evading the first man. Then the first drive can be productive rather than a 2m gain under huge pressure like it is now. All our pack should be looking to offload, fighting for that rather than extra yardage like we do now. This forces the opposition to compress and opens the space out wide that the likes of Watkins, Moon, McGuire enjoy so much at Leeds. It's risky, we don't have players with the technical ability Leeds have, but it's the future and we need to adapt to it and sign players that can play that way.

Our current tactics of low risk percentage plays ALL THE TIME would be okay if we had two or three dangerous individuals who can worry the defensive line and create breaks from nothing. We don't have that.

We still make a lot of errors even though it is low risk rugby !!
Perhaps we should try something a bit more inventive.

The pack are big enough and good enough to offload but who do we have to come running through; certainly not our halves or three quarters.

It the pack don't offload then the backs soon go out of the habit of making the runs to scoop the offload up.

I'm going back a bit but when we signed Derek McVey, our backs knew what he was going to do so they made sure to be on his shoulder, much like the Leeds lads around Cuthbertson.

Our forwards rarely look for the offload. They instead retain possession, and that's clearly an instruction from the coach. Keep hold of the ball and play the percentages.

Not at all. My main point was about the statements I often see on here about having the best pack on paper, or the best squad on paper. They're just opinions dressed up to look like facts. And there nonsense (another opinion).

My other point is that K C being who he is would be a hard man to sack if it came to it. And if it did come to it I wouldn't want what he did as a coach to tarnish people's view of him overall as that would diminish his deserved legendary status as a player.

I cannot stand our tactics this season. The early kick and one up rugby is just dull, and not indicative of Saints style of play as a whole. It's even more annoying when you think how well we started this season; the Souths game really knocked the stuffing out of us, and I wonder if KC lost his confidence in the style of play and reverted to a much more conservative style?

It needs changing though, as it's not working.

Having all those injured players heading into mid season, especially the pivotal ones sat in the stands had a lot to do with it, and now with our half backs in poor form we are stuck in a bit of a rut.

Also Soliola and Manu not being replaced like for like hash,t helped either. Especially Manu who could create havoc with his offloads.

I think its all down to 1, 6 , 7 and 9 playing with form to get us playing with a bit of creativity and direction.

Surely Manu was replaced with Vea? he was tearing defences to shreds until he got injured

I'd give KC two years and then review.

I don't think it will tarnish KC's playing career if it does not work out. Murphy is still regarded as a great and from what I recall his coaching tenure at Saints was somewhat volatile.


What I don't get is that Brown got a full year to do what he liked, after taking a holiday before joining us. He was given a free ride in his first 12 months (rightly so in my opinion), he did not go very well in that first year.

Now cunningham 6 months in, gets us to a semi final and will more than likely end 2nd or 3rd. yet people are already sharpening the knives. Something about it feels wrong.

I did not want him to get the job, but now he is in there, he should have at least 2 years before we start with considering to sack him.

Apart from Brown took over a team with no coach and fit halves. KC took over the super league champions

Hence the two years.

I think that's a reasonable amount of time to allow a coach to have with a team before reviewing. Anything shorter looks like indecision at the top of the club.

If you think we make a lot of errors, I'd hate to hear what you think of the 10 teams in Super League that have made more errors than us this year!



So our backs can improve by attempting to beat a defender (which they have never considered or attempted before)?



The problem with our playing style is that when you look at our squad, we've got pretty decent props and good line-running second rowers as our two main strengths IMO. Our second rowers (bar Wilkin) aren't the type to catch the ball early and put on some footwork or give a pass, but they can all hit a line cutting in from our halves. In our own half, the defence can stack in tight on these line runners and be prepared to drift if we go out the back. Consequently, we're only really dangerous from 20 out, where these line runners ie Greenwood can find an arms tackle and get through. We also don't have a similar quality linerunner on the right hand side with Wilkin (meaning Greenwood on the left) and Vea out, meaning our spread plays are much less effective that way and Percival doesn't get enough ball.

Our halves don't help in that the reason we never get enough early ball to our backs is the defence can fly up on our centres, knowing our halves don't have the pace to run themselves. This is why we have to play so structured with our three second man plays in order to get the ball to the centres; so the block runners can keep the defence honest given Walsh and Burns don't have the running threat to do so. Walsh I can kinda accept because he at least has a bit of vision and a kicking game, but I can't really see what Burns contributes.

I,ve got Vea more of a Soliola type player who can also play prop when needed, we are missing Vea's energy at the moment. Manu never got replaced, we know he made plenty of errors but he also made most of our offloads, this is missing from most of our games as we become more and more predictable with our flat attack.
Friday's game will be interesting to see if we have made tactical changes, I,m just hoping our half backs provide more options otherwise it will be a "General Moan - Part 2"