I think a major differences with Wigan this last few weeks is that they have gone away from winning ugly & started playing open rugby which is what we are renowned for. Unfortunately, when someone plays us at our own game we are left wanting.

When we went ahead I knew they would come back, when they went ahead I knew we wouldn't. Depressing really.

p.s: Bailey was godawful last night.

Yes we didn't bottle it, we just had no answer to their forwards.... they were comfortably finishing every set in our half. Our line speed and aggression in contact just wasn't there.

Sims, george king, Bailey, Wilde were just out of their depth against the Wigan pack, absolutely no go forward and you cannot afford so many passengers.

Spot on. At the [istart[/i of the second half we were making 30m in a set of six on average. That won't win you a training session let alone a GF.

What's the deal with Wilde? Last night, and in the semi, he was subbed after barely 20 minutes and only returned for the final quarter, so why have him starting at all? Seems an odd tactic. Toby King (Wilde's replacement) played more minutes in the second row than him.

Name-checking Wilde in the dissection is akin to slapping puppies, or taking McDonalds off fat children, but this is a day for the truth, and this is the truth. Here, today, he is a long, long way from the finished article, has yet to convince me he will be good enough, was a passenger last night and allayed with a weak, ineffective bench we got found out.

And before anyone leaps on me and their keyboards in faux-outrage, and asks me who I'd have played instead, I suggested T.King in the back-row in the week, which is basically what happened after 20 mins. thus weakening our interchange.

We should of started with Toby King at 2nd row. With Wilde as sub.

In the cold light of day when you look at those four we cannot be surprised our pack was dominated. Buck stops with Smith. All his signings and selections.

Smith seems to be a coach who can win with a team assembled by others but fails to build his own team. All gone very stale, every coach has a shelf life.

He built this team: only 3 remained from 2013 GF. This team won the LLS, and got both finals. That might not be enough for you and a lot of others; fair enough. However, it's better than 95%+ of our history, and make my words, in years to come, we'll be begging for a team that fails as well as this one has.

This team hasn't won the GF or CC though and surely that is the whole point? I am not sure we can make comparisons to the past, the club is now a very different animal and expectations are higher.

The problem is the failings are clear to see. The pack is not fit for purpose. We are burning out Hill (he looked shattered on Saturday) covering for the lack of go forward for others.

Plus we have no plan B. When we can't get fast play the ball we are nullified.

There us no point comparing us with the team pre money, we have ambitions now of being the best in SL.

If Wane had failed to win the GF at the 3rd time of asking he would have been replaced - no doubt about it. Even if he had won the shield and made the CC final. The true top teams board do not tolerate continued failure.

Maybe so but where exactly, or more precisely who is Rugby League's Pep Guardiola?

Sorry Wires but I also think that compared to last year this year has been a relative success not a "continued failure" Most of the frustration is surely borne out of us missing out when we had a decent tilt at all three trophies, that's not the same as finishing 5th with no chance of making 4th after the split and a drubbing in the CC semi

Fair point. I would counter with saying we don't need a Pep Guardiola, Wane has showed that. Players playing in positions, team spirit, aggressive pack, and a squad capable of withstanding a number of absentees. Under Smith we could not even start the season with recognised players in their positions, never mind end the season such. We have zero pace out wide and a powderpuff pack.

If we compare this season to the failure of the last 13, 14 and 15 then yes it was a relative improvement but not success. Success is winning the big prize.

Some people who suggest this season was a success remind me of the teachers at my daughters primary school where all the class got a winners sticker pinned on them when they finished the 50m dash.

We need to be comparing success against the likes of Saints, Wigan, Leeds not based on the last 20 years of where we were.

That could start a rumour or three.

I would say progression but no impression.

The truth is you weren't a million miles away. Wigan were the better team, BUT Lineham was twice within inches of scoring from kicks and Gidley dropped a difficlt pass when he may have scored.

Fine margins on which games are won and lost. I do wish we (as a game) would stop this endless scooting from dummy half, Wigan were almost as guilty last night, it's the most one dimensional form of rugby.

You're a good poster when you're not attempting to score points.
A bit like us last night I suppose.

I agree with you entirely about the current style of rugby being served up.
I suspect our own reliance on dummy half running is partly based on knowing most of our three-quarters are not especially blessed with what I regard as natural, creative rugby skills.
This style won't be enough to win finals as officials are very reluctant, probably under orders, to keep penalties to a minimum and some of the advantage we are able to gain during the regular season (God I hate that term) is negated.

At half-time (when we were winning) our group chat was all about how little rugby had been served up.
Phrases such as "this is horrible" and "no enjoyment whatsoever" were used.

Strong defence should, of course, be rewarded, but I do think some radical reform may be necessary to encourage flair, creativity and attack in general.

I've heard talk of only one marker, reducing the 10 metres, dropping the number of interchanges, etc.
But I wonder whether something as radical as reducing teams to 12 a side might be worth experimenting with.

Yes constant scoots are now waring thin on me, Wigan played us fantastically at it last night when Russell or ratch came to dummy the Wigan markers were as quick to their feet as the player playing the ball. Not every time.


Were the personal out there good enough to win it? Possibly with an adapted game plan to adjust to who wad on the pitch. In hindsight I would not have includedsandow on the bench but philbin for a bit more size

Wort a note that there was no Westwood currie Dodds Harrison available tonight them in our pack makes for a closer contest in the forwards

In all the gfs we've not capitalised on our position or been able to deal with adversity which is more worrying than anything else for me.

God help Saints if the scoots from acting hb are suppressed.
That has been the root of their simple game for the last 2 decades.

That's what earned them the entertainers tag from their cheerleaders Eddie and Stevo.

We were saying the same. Haven't watched the highlights back, but saw the build up with Tanya Arnold before turning over and it's clear they all expected a free flowing game. At least from us! I'd guess most neutrals were disappointed on that level.

I didn't. I put on one of the threads. I didn't think there would be 20 points scored between the both of us.
Gutted I don't spread bet.

We haven't played good rugby since Sandow got injured, people only seem to mention it though after a loss.

We aren't going to play attractive rugby when Atkins and Evans both cannot pass, and Gidley is also a black hole a lot of the time.