Before the match Phil Clarke made the (IMO ridiculous) suggestion that having three kicking options made Saints a more dangerous prospect than when Sean Long takes on the responsibility himself.

I think Friday night showed that the number of options we have actually hinders us, as there always seemed to be a great deal of indecision on the last tackle.

You can see what Potter's idea is: spread the kicking duties around to keep the pressure off Eastmond while he gets the hang of guiding the team round the park. However, I think that, for the benefit of the team, ONE man needs to be taking responsibility for the kicking game and last tackle options. I think that should be Kyle - he has already shown that responsibility doesn't worry him. He would be bound to make the odd bad call, but frankly he couldn't do any worse on his own than the trio did on Friday.

Any thoughts?

I agree with you in the idea that more options = more indecision. Give it to Kyle and sink or swim. Its good to have other options, but we should have someone who is always first choice for the 6th tackle options, then we would have less of the farce of the turnover so many times in the match.

As long as he includes Leon and possibly Wilkin in the kicking department I don't mind. We could do with a couple of forty twenties on Sunday which would help ease the burdon on our forwards.

Did he mean Kyle, Gilmour and Jammer?

On the flip side of that, getting caught in possession on the last tackle through being in two or three minds doesn't do our forwards any favours either.

Exactamundo

All we need is one man screaming for the ball from first reciever on the 5th tackle, and the second choice kicker at second reciever just in case.

Its a case of one man taking control and organising, but as has been previously mentioned this pressure may have been taken off Kyle. It seems to have been a problem since Long has been out, but I'm sure they'll work it out. I'd just let Eastmond do it, as its part of a scrum halfs game at the end of the day and he has to learn sometime.

Did take the p*ss on Friday when Kyle was unmarked yet we threw the ball out to Gilmour who put in an absolutely awful kick which then put us on the back foot.

It's normally the case when Long is here. Pryce is running the plays in his absence but there is no structure on the last play as Pryce doesn't do much kicking. Kyle needs to take more responsibility overall but especially on the last, some of the things we did on the last play on Friday weren't fit to grace an Under 10's game.

Friday was a shambles at times Wigan put us under immense kick pressure (quite probably from offside positions) and it showed through our indecision who was kicking we got it wrong a lot.

I do sort of agree with Phil Clarke but only IF the player doing the kicking on a particular set KNEW he was going to do the kick that way no indecision, less pressure.

If managed correctly, just imagine how hard it would be for a defending team to work out positions if they don't know where the kick is coming from, players can't rush out quite as much to pressure the kicker, both wingers can't drop back fully or risk the ball going through hands out wide & the full back can't stray too far to either side in case the ball goes the other way

The thing is, it's fine in games in which our pack is on top and we're in control, as there is generally a lot more time to make these decisions. I see what you mean about designating a kicker for each set, but in a tight game in which space and time are at a premium and fatigue is an issue I think it just overcomplicates things and gives the dummy half more things to worry about. Of course, there should always be someone available as an alternative should the main kicker be closed down, but IMO a stable side has to have somebody out there calling the shots.

Another issue is that (IMO) Pryce isn't a particularly good kicker, and while Wilkin has a cultured boot he isn't that consistent.

Either way, it certainly didn't work on Friday.

It's not the first time this has happened this season, including two games with Longy at 7 - one was Magic Weekend, wasn't it?

Correct, it has happened a few times. Needs sorting. It's schoolboy stuff

Maybe the idea of a number of players kicking is new to the Saints so it is something they are still adjusting to?

I think it would be ideal to have as many kickers as possible in the side. Not only does it have the potential to confuse the opposition but it also means that we are not left relying upon one person to do all the kicking, an element of our play that I know Saints fans have been bemoaning for a while now (both in field and goalkicking).

It happened when Bradford beat us at KR earlier in the season.

In one set we even lost 30 metres as the ball was being passed backwards waiting for someone to put a kick in.

our last tackle plays are a shambolic (and its no better when Long plays)

We have the worst kicking game in SL by far

That was hilarious and embarrassing in equal measure.

Then judging by the league standings, a kicking game doesn't count for a great deal these days.

I agree we just need to get used to the last tackle options. For the last 10 years it has been pass it to long with maybe Scully and now Leon and Wilkin as second options. I am sure given more time in training Saints will get better at it.