They faired very well, although I think they had a few injuries. Hopefully nothing serious. Watt and Flynn were most noticeable. Troublesome players both.

Very, very well. They were the more 'up for it' team and were pretty dominant early in the game. I'd say the Widnes attack was the more creative of the two and the more willing to attack from deep. Widnes scored a couple of really well constructed tries and looked to have a good balance of pace and power in the backline. I like the look of Hanbury and Paddy Flynn took his tries well.

Defensively Widnes' approach was borderline Wigan-esque. It would be a shame if they went down the negative Wigan route and tried to play anti-rugby next season. There were periods of deliberate holding down, attention on standing legs and getting unneccessary numbers into the tackle in order to slow the game down. Being a friendly it worked to a degree, although without the defensive discipline Wigan have it might not be so successful in a SL game. I think Widnes will be pleased with the showing, they won't be flogged every week like some teams have been in SL on that showing and there should be enough there to do quite well at home particularly. They were very creative and were clearly at a more advanced stage of preparation than Saints, who were very rusty. Two tries in 30 seconds towards the end made the score unrepresentative of the game itself IMO.

You have to take into account the fact that there were unlimited interchanges tonight, so there were a lot of changes on both sides at times.

Better than us for most of it.

Paddy Flynn had a bet with my nephew that if he scored one try he would get his mates a pint each, score two and he would get them a pint and shots and score three (which he clearly didn't expect to do) he would get them a pint, shots and strip naked and run down Market Street.
The things you bet on and regret eh...........?

Very well. Their forwards stuck up for themselves and Handbury and Watts were really impressive in the halves.

Gaskell, Makinson and Ashe all really impressed, Perry, Clough and Dixon looked good in bursts in the forwards, Wheeler showed flashes of quality on the rare occasions the ball went his way (and lasted a full 80 minutes). Hohaia also looked dangerous (to both teams mind you) a few times running with the ball, and Sia got a few good smacks in... That's about it as far as positives go really... Mostly all down to unfamiliar territory and pre-season rustiness etc. I'm sure, so nothing to be worried about particularly yet, but I was just a little alarmed at Foster's terrible defensive howlers seemingly carrying on from last season. He needs to sort it out and fast. Also Lomax' kicking game looked no better than last season (although perhaps unfair to judge in the conditions) which is another slight worry. In fact our tactical kicking game generally was simply shocking throughout - some teamsheet juggling to squeeze Gaskell in somewhere may start to become a priority...

I thought it was a difficult game to assess with so many interchanges and Royce trying so many different options.
Widnes looked better as they more a less kept to a 17 man team with not a lot of interchanges until they had injuries.
Did notice the lack of ball bounce on the pitch, and that windy NW corner kick when the ball comes back.
Only noticeable things seemed to be the lack of momentum with our pack and the difference in attack when Gaskell came on.

I thought Widnes did very well, they looked like a team that had been together much longer than they have. The halfbacks looked good and paddy Flynn took his tries well.

I think saints class told in the end but up until last 15 mins I thought Widnes was slightly the better side and IMO had a perfectly good try ruled off when foster dropped another kick.

On the subject of foster, he looked shocking!

I don't think you need more than one friendly. The season is a long, hard slog and as Leeds proved, it doesn't matter if you're poor early on as long as you finish well. They had the best season of anyone last year and they finished 5th! We're also lucky we have London and Salford up 1st, two teams who are likely to be in the lower half of the table. It gives us a chance to build momentum rather than playing someone like Wigan or Warrington early when we're not ready (like last year).

Whilst Saints looked rusty and poor at times, we will improve as the season goes on and we have time to find our best form and side (which I think is up for debate at this stage). I just hope we're in the mix again come the end of the season and do justice in the new stadium.

The main things to take out of last night IMO are that Makinson and Gaskell MUST start....Gaskell looked to have beefed up and cruised around the pitch, also gives us the only option of a kicking game...

I've said since the first play off game against the pies last year that gaskell has to be the first name on the sheet in the halves but as Royce got the balls to drop young superstar lomax or the highly paid world cup winning kiwi?

I think the Saints team that plays at the end of the season will look distinctly different to the one that starts against the Broncos.

Don't you think it's a little unfair that Gaskell won't be first choice?

IMO he earned his right to start after a good season last year.

I can't see gaskell be happy Sat on the bench at the start of the season for me he as to start at six because come up against the top teams in the league without a kicking game and we will get battered he gives us a far better option on the last the anyone else in the team plus he give us a good thirty metres on penaltys which no one else does plus he is the best half back at the club

I do, and I think that is the view of the majority of speccies too. However, the best thing he can do, is to keep performing like he did last night, and prove that he is an absolutely vital cog in a successful Saints wheel. Whilst he is doing that, Lomax, Hohaia, Makinson, Foster, Wellens, Gardner, Meli all eaqually have points to prove, because the inclusion of Gaskell will mean a reshuffle elsewhere, and at least one of them losing their place. Chuck into that mix a fit Wheeler, and Royce really does have some big decisions to make. The chock stone in all this is the Hohaia contract, which sees an aging overseas player, on a sizeable wedge of salary cap, squeezing out some of our best and brightest talent. He is under the greatest pressure to perform, if he doesn't, then we have a major white elephant on our hands.

I definitely agree on Gaskell. He's our most natural and rounded half back with a really strong kicking game. Put Hohaia or Lomax alongside him with the other at full back and you have a strong combination. Makinson has earned his spot in th side but where you play him (full back or wing) is another question.

Did Hohaia go to hooker and Roby to loose forward when Gaskell came on?

No, he played at full back with Gardner going off and Makinson to the wing. We did a fair bit of rotation so he may have played at hooker at some point, but I didn't notice it. He did run out of dummy half a few times and cause problems though so I see that being an option at some stage in the season.

I liked the look of lance at fullback, he looked more at home there and Gaskell looked more at home at 6 so wello IMO has a real fight on his hands with lance and makinson possibly going to fullback.

Jane foster looks to have carried his poor form at the back end of last year in to the year, hes a accident waiting to happen and total liability under any high kick. He's going to have a busy time under the high ball this year.

Gaskell actually came on in the centre for Meli to start with before moving to stand off and changing the game.

Gaskell is a must for us at halfback!

The good thing is that we have a couple of months to work out our best team before we start getting to the really important matches. The other good thing is that we are choosing from a position of strength, we have great options in the backs, we aren't scratching about trying to find a combination that may work, given a bit of luck. We also have players like Lomax, Gaskell, Makinson, Shenton, Wheeler, Ashe and possibly Jane(!) who will be our backline for the next decade. If they do gel we can focus our attention, and overseas quote on filling the slightly more problematic prop position. All in all, we are in a far stronger position than 12 months ago when we were scouring the world for any half back to fill the yawning gaps at 6 and 7.

True.

Ashe looked good again last night.

How did Flanagan play last night?

Forgot he was playing

Wow, as well as that!