I have answered you about Hopoate. I think in your fury to reply and win a point you have skimmed over it.

I am not derailing anything. I picked up on something NK said and I argued the point. That's it, the end of it. Why are you still going on? If you don't like threads derailing then leave it.

I'm not being a smart a*se or anything else. That explains why your obsessing on the statement you have was incorrect as you didn't know the context. You can't have it both ways mate. If you're insisting you're righting a wrong then you de facto invite the same to be applied to your own statements. Do you disagree?

NK said it was a fact we had never been without 5, 6 or 7 players. He didn't mention for how long in the comment I responded to. I picked up on that and argued the point and proved that in fact we had. I have since gone on to say that I agree we haven't been without players for a sustained period.

There are only so many times I can't type those same words. That really is it. Like I keep saying, if you don't want the thread derailing, then leave it.

You did answer but there were so many replies it skipped a page. My apologies for missing it.

So from your answer you agree that NK had a point when not considering Hopoate a viable option at fullback now?

I love the way you answer and then tell others to leave it!



Tell you what; I'll answer this once then we can both leave it, hey?



Firstly you haven't answered anything. You gave 2 examples, both of which actually proved NK's point. The first one has 4 first teamers missing, not 5 and the 2nd one you lost (which was exactly the point being made in the first place). You've disproved nothing so far

Secondly, by your own admission, you haven't read the thread so have no context with which to show his statement as wrong anyway. If you had read the thread you'll have known that it related to a sustained period of injury so you 'proving' that NK was wrong was totally unnecessary.

There. I've had the last say. Let's leave it now, shall we?

No I don't. He wouldn't be 1st choice but could still slot in comfortably in my opinion. He did play there for a spell in the friendly v Leigh and looked good to be fair. So I think when discussing depth and versatility, Hopoate would be a more than adequate back up to Welsby.

Ok. I can't say I know enough about him now to have a strong opinion either way. If you think there wouldn't be a big drop off in quality I'm more than happy to take your word for it.

I see no- one has mentioned that we were without 5 injured players yesterday and still won.

No Knowles, Lees, Walmsley, Matautia or Hopoate

After last week's defeat I assumed Knowles was dropped?

Wingfield played though, so all is well



Bet it was as a good day out that yesterday. Pretty jealous with that draw for Saints but not as much on the next one.

Against championship opposition and you were poor. Still, you did manage to put a similar amount of points on Haven as the mighty Sheffield Eagles did the week before so we can conclude that, without those players mentioned you're at least as good as them

If lost those many players for a few games (like Wigan in the past) you would lose more games than win

Stu, put the fishing rod away, you're far better than that.

I thought the

would have been the give away that it was tongue in cheek.

Eh?

I said Wigan have "more" average players than Saints. I did not say all your players were average and I certainly didn't say Field was (indeed I said you would struggle to score points without him at the moment and he is electric against lazy defenders but that I'd like to see him more against the league's big boys before making my mind up). Do you disagree? If so, say so rather than pretending I said Wigan players are average and Saints players world class.

The only time I mentioned "world class" was regarding Walmsley. Alex Walmsley IS world class. Wigan do not have any world class players. Bateman had a claim at one pont but there has been nothing world class about him since he returned to Wigan. Again, feel free to disagree if you like with what I ACTUALLY said. FWIW I think AW is the only genuinely world class player across the two squads, with Roby/Knowles the best of the rest.

If I said the words Christmas and Tuesday in a post it wouldn't mean I was saying every day is either Christmas or Tuesday, so I don't really know what you're on about in trying to pretend I said all players are average or world class. Feels a bit diversionary to me so I ignored it.

It’ll all go back to what is ‘World Class’ this but I’d be tempted to say if Walmsley is then Bateman absolutely is. One is battering an average superleague and the other proved his class in the best league (by an absolute mile) in the world. One is yet to prove anything on the international stage and the other has played a big part for England over a number of seasons. They’re the only two that come in to the conversation though, I’ll give you that (Knowles could take that next step soon and maybe prove it in the World Cup).

In terms of what is world class, I’d say it’s one of the best 5-10 players in their position in the world. If it’s a position there is only one of, like fullback, hooker or loose forward, I’d say you need be top 5 but if it’s a position were there are two of them starting the game, such as centre, prop or second row, I’d push it to top 10. That is absolutely my own personal opinion though and everyone will see what ‘World Class’ is differently.

On that basis Walmsley and Bateman have a case but I’d probably find it easier to put a case forward for Bateman, due to him throwing the superleague comfort blanket off and testing himself where he could prove it. I think Walmsley would go pretty well in the NRL but it wouldn’t be a walk in the park for him. His size and rep here would put a huge target on him. The World Cup is huge for his reputation on a wider scale IMO.

The Canberra Bateman was most definitley world class. Has he performed at the same level since his return? Nowhere near IMO. Whether his shoulder injury is more of a problem or not, who knows but he has been nothing like the same player. Farrell has been way more consistent. Being completely honest I'm not too fussed if he plays against us or not anymore and I definitely wouldn't have said that a couple of years ago.

Now that I've said this, he'll rip it up on Good Friday!!

But this is exactly what I said - Bateman showed it at one point but hasn't been remotely world class since his return - by the way he plays in the same average superleague that AW does, just without looking world class. Which willl probably be pinned on the players around him, before the next post says Saints are useless without AW

Bateman has played at a world class level, I've seen him improve somewhat lately but he's still nowhere near the player he was when he previously at Wigan.

It's fair to compare him against his old Wigan performances but I'm not so sure we can compare against his Canberra appearances (yes he played against a higher level of opposition but he did have better class of teammates around him as well).

If he can get back to anywhere he was prior to leaving us I'd be happy.

Anyway back to my original point, if refs clampdown on moving off the mark (yes AW I'm looking at you), something in his game that's even been mentioned on RedVee, what do you think the effect will be on Saints ?
Just telling him to move back and play the ball slows your attack down considerably (happened in the Wigan/Salford game last week).

I think if this happened AW will carry on carrying for well over 100m every game, busting tackles, winning collisions and being the best prop in the league and we would be just fine

No doubt he'd still be the best prop in the league but I reckon not being able to take the markers out of the game will definitely slow your attack down and let's face it, it is pretty one dimensional, batter up the middle, put on "the move" and if the batter up the middle gets slowed down then "the move" becomes much easier to defend

I think the Bateman demise has been exaggerated to a degree. He’s having a good season so far and he’s certainly a guy I see as a big game player, so hopefully he’ll have some of those to play in. I’ll be honest though, I think there was maybe a view from him last year that superleague was a step down (and it is) and just a general come down after having to be at his very best week in, week out for the previous two years (it’s not easy playing in an appalling team also and that’s what we were). I think a fire is building in him again but like it or not, you are only as good as those around you and he needs them to perform, just like they need him.

Bateman has cash in the bank in regards to being World class but it doesn’t last for ever. Walmsley himself and the whole Saints team seem to be able to find motivation to win every collision in (most) games, let alone the game as a whole, so fair play for that and Walmsley is pushing himself and playing at the absolute top of his game. I do think he’s World Class but the NRL isn’t easy and people will always be convinced by either a) him doing it in the NRL or b) Him doing it on the international stage. You look at Thompson and he seems to be slowly regressing in to a run of the mill NRL prop forward and I thought his form before he went there was ‘World Class’ as well.

I pray Walmsley shows us how World Class he is in the World Cup. We’re going to need him to do that to stand a chance of winning it.

There is a slight obsession on here with "the move" and Saints (which understandably comes from trying to draw parallels between our current success and the fact that Wigan fans said their own team was boring to watch the last time they had a succesful side that defended with intesity).

I think what is meant by "the move" is a sweeping move ending with a cut-out pass to a winger? If so, I think we've scored about 140 points in our last 4 games and maybe scored a try like this about 4 or 5 times?

The winger passing the ball back inside still counts as "the move"