I agree,no reason to think we cannot do the double now,next year should be even more interesting with Cooper etc.

You’re presuming that we won’t get better though. How do you know we won’t sign someone to replace Grace? Dodd will be back, Welsby a year older etc. No planned departures other than Grace. Lomax will be fully recovered too.

Before Dodd got injured we were unbelievable, both in attack and defence.

Re my accused hyperbole on gaining ground: just looked at the stats - looks like saints had only two players across the 17 with less that 7m average gain (Norman and Wingfield, both 6m).

For Wigan, 10 of the 17 players had under 7m average gain. In the forwards there was Byrne (5), Smithies (6), Mago (6), Powell (3), Singleton (3). Plus Cust, Isa, Field, Bibby, Smith.

The narrative is usually that saints pack is ordinary without Walmsley but they were excellent yesterday and needed to be.

Wigan did very well to come as close as they did - defence was absolutely brilliant and they have genuine strike players who can create points off the back foot.

Field did absolutely nothing but get clattered but then nearly won the game for you with a moment of magic.

It's missing the point and that's what I'm trying to say. It's like me pointing out how bad your kicking was and ignoring the reason for it.

Aside from create our other two tries?

But yes - the main problem Wigan have against Saints remains the same. They make a lot of post contact metres - we don't. For me getting players in the team who may help with that should be the priority even if they have other limitations - the likes of Miski, Thornley, KPP.

I have mixed feelings on our two prop forward signings - Ellis has been pretty solid but certainly doesn't look one of the competition's top front rowers whereas Mago is unfit and relies purely on an offload to make an impact when I was hoping he would eat up the metres.

Having an ineffective Shorrocks and a practically unused Partington didn't help matters.

How is it missing the point? You keep saying talking about missing players is BS but then say saints pack is on top because you’re missing Thornley (seriously?!?), Ellis and KPP. It’s common knowledge that makinson and Percival are a massive part of our go forward that Walmsley then benefits from. None of them were there but the pack was still comfortably on top, but the reason was the players you had out?

Odd.

Those stats for wigans pack are par for the course. Their forwards always have woeful stats because their pack is so poor. They just rely on Field making something out of nothing and that’s their game plan. Bateman again was absolutely anonymous save for getting smashed by Matautia. It’s these games you want your leaders stepping up but Bateman was just too intimidated by Joe Bathchelor and Matty Lees to do anything of note.

If Wigan had a better pack, I think they would have won that game yesterday easily. I’m not sure Cooper Is the answer though

I thought Field was excellent. A constant threat, had Saints back peddling when he had the ball, 2 unbelievable assists and a good hand in the Bateman try.

If ever there was a game to dispel the Saints fans ‘he’s just quick’ line, that was it but we still get the ‘he did nothing’ line’. Standard stuff.

Standard stuff again.

Bateman

39 tackles
154 metres
1 try
Top metre making forward on the field from either side

Batchelor absolutely outstanding as well. Man of the match for me.

Despite Saints pack making more yards, Wigan had the game won even with 12 men and threw it away with a dumb last set.

I’ll have to watch the tries again - what did he do for the Bateman try? And was his the final pass for the first French try (I thought it was Smith at the time but fair play if it was Foeld, it was a beauty).

I thought Bateman and Havard were your best forwards, other than the daft offload which was a killer.

So you did say that...then you didn't ..and now you're saying it again. Which is it mate?

It’s neither - what you initially reorted me as saying was nothing like what I actually said.

I’m very happy to respond to things I actually said in the context I said them, and very happy to point out when I didn’t say something.

You quoted me as saying before the season started that you are replacing average players with average players. What I actually said is signing any props would improve you (like the two you signed) and replacing the coach was the biggest thing, which it has been.

You then dredged up a post about me saying an fans overrate their young forwards who tend to be undersized and not that effective, and that few of your best players have come through the club. I still think that is absolutely true bar Harvard who is progressing well and has some size.

Mate! It's almost verbatim what you said! What's more, you've said it again 2 posts up!

Please stop playing the "I didn't say that" card when you clearly did. You're better than that.

It was Field and it was a peach. He run a good line for the Bateman try, sucked in a defender and passed the ball on to Isa in space. Simple bit of play but still a fair part in it.

I know you’re sensible, so I’m not bagging you but at times it feels like he can’t really win Field. If he’s only going to be considered to have had a top game against Saints when he’s run 250m, scored 2 full lengthers, set 3 up and pulled off multiple try saving tackles, we’ll be waiting a long time. I thought it was a pretty well rounded display from him yesterday and against a side that was piling pressure on us.

What are you on about? You said pre-season I said you were replacing average players with average players. I didn’t say that, I said the props you signed would make a big difference and the biggest plus was a change of coach.

I also said you were bringing through undersized ineffective forwards which is a completely different point but I’m happy to stand by both of those different points.

I also said some injuries effect us more in relative terms than Wigan because of the quality of the first XVII, with Wigan having more options but less top quality so replacing players is easier generally. For example Dodd, Makinson, Percival, Walmsley yesterday and the equivalents missing for Wigan in Tommy, Thornley, KPP and Ellis. One set missing results in a bigger drop in quality than the other - I’d suggest that’s just obvious.

I think you are conflating all of those points to bend to your purpose when they are all distinct separate points, all of which I still think are 100% correct by the way.

It was and he needs to stop that stupidity. We have usual suspects making daft errors in the Saints games this season and in the cup final. They’re all good players but I’m looking at Marshall, Smith and Bateman. All three have had great games in some of those but they’ve been guilty of really basic errors.

Havard was outstanding yesterday. He needs to find that level consistently but he’s getting there.

I’ve made it clear I rate Field both on here and on redvee. I didn’t realise he made that pass yesterday (mistaken identity, thought it was smith)and have already said if he did - fair play it was a peach.

I’ve even literally ridiculed some of the redvee nonsense about Field on this very forum saying it reminds me of the garbage peddled about offiah by some saints fans at that time (“all he does it score tries”! Well yeah!)

I think people read what they want to read and remember what they want to remember sometimes.

And let's put the stats in perspective shall we? Most metres by any prop, either side: Ethan Havard. Only one Saints prop made over 100 metres. All your metres came from the backs and back row (just like ours) and the "world class" Morgan Knowles made a grand total of 13 metres more than Smithies despite being on the field for twice as long!

You didn't. I've posted what you actually said. There's no point me posting your own words if you're going to deny you said them!

As for bringing undersized props through; Byrne is as big as anything you have and Havard is consistently the biggest metre maker on the field as he was again yesterday. As posted above, our "undersized" Smithies made 13 metres less than your "world class" Knowles despite being on for half the time. The only "undersized" prop we have is Partington and he rarely plays.

You're normally a good poster but you're losing the plot on this mate. If you're "standing by what you say" why keep denying it?

Once again you're repeating exactly what I said you said in the original post. Why the feck are you denying it one minute and then posting the same thing a minute later and saying you stand by it? You've lost it mate. I suggest you take a break.

That's interesting, only Dodd's and KPP missed the semi-final and clearly Wigan were the better team?

We weren't. We played well for 5 minutes and fluked a try off a Saints mistake.

Correct. Tommy plays and that does not happen. Having said that Saints were the better team.