Care to elaborate on the 'strengths' that you have spotted that Shaun Wane hasn't and while you're at it tell us how you would have coached them? And do you think that as Madge's assistant he might have had some input into those 'systems'?

I'm sure that Shaun Wane will be waiting with baited breath for your reply, as are we all.

Positives -

- the overall performance. Having looked at that Brisbane side and the other teams' performances, to get a draw after 80 was the best performance of the week end (and far better than Saints');
- Bateman, again. Just in time we have found Lockers' replacement;
- the centres. Didn't look like the weakness we are always being told. Did damage against world class opponents. Loved Gelling's charge down;
- Clubb and Tautai (too briefly);
- I think Logan looks more effective and aggressive this year (at long last), so we don't miss Mac quite as much as we did last year; and
- considering that this was a step up from SL, I thought Williams went pretty well. He could make it.

Negatives -
- last tackle options were dire, again;
- the props struggled. Even here, though, they will have learnt, Flower will be back one day, Clubb and Tautai did a good job, and they won't have to face a pack of top internationals till next year's World club Challenge;
- Bowen. Jim Bowen would be more use. Having desperately tried to see something there, in attack he kills move after move.

Overall, I was proud of the effort. I found it to be as intense and enthralling match as I have seen in ages. Our last try deserved to earn the draw.

Well i would have all your answers if I was a coach and not an electrician, but IMO wanes game plan does not suit the players he has at his disposal (which lenegan must take a lot of the blame it's not all on wane that but that's a different discussion) hence me saying we don't play a game plan to our players strengths. I'm not going to claim I'm some sort of armchair coach who knows everything, but I can clearly see that we really need to change it up the way we play instead of still bagging our head against a wall doing the same set moves over and over again, which lets be honest the better defensive teams can cope with.
For me we should go back to basics especially in our own half instead of recklessly passing the ball along the line for the sake of it sometimes in our own 10 meters, we should concentrate on strong drives, win the ruck, good kick and chase. Strong defence and limit the opposition field position and hunt the mistake, much like the Aussies do, when in good field position put the razzle dazzle on so to speak. Rugby is a pretty simple game and we/wane over complicate it with too much high risk rugby.
IMO the pack is too weak and the halves aren't good enough to play like this, I hope I'm proved wrong and wanes game plan does the business and we win something but it ain't going to happen Imo.

100% correct. Don't you just love keyboard coaches.

As to Wane, there are 2 sides to the game. It bears repeating the obvious, but if you score more than the opposition you win. Brisbane scored only 1 try of their own making. That is a superb effort. It is possible that the effort in defence detracted from the attack. But, Wane clearly knows how to coach defence.
In attack, we have a method which depends heavily on Lockers' ability to tie up the middle of the opposition defence. When he plays well, we are the best team in SL. What has taken too long is a structure that works in Lockers' inevitible absences. Maybe over the next few weeks we will see Bateman take on that role. I think he can do, and signing him was a superb bit of recruitment.
Finally, it is crystal clear that we are having to make do, as is the whole competition, with the limited resources at our disposal. It is some achievement to put together a team drawing so heavily on such a small area, which can go toe to toe with Brisbane, with their infinite resources.
Now, everything that anybody has ever done could have been done better, but I think in this instance we can be justifiably proud of our lads who did themselves and the competition proud. Wane has made plenty of mistakes, but he did a good job last week.

Neat post, with a little nugget in the middle.... This is key...

(Finally, it is crystal clear that we are having to make do, as is the whole competition, with the limited resources at our disposal.)

What worries me is that IL, at the fans forum, clearly stated that the Salary Cap isn't a problem.

But surely it's right that *just* increasing the SC is no panacea? It doesn't make existing English players any better. It *might* discourage a few from leaving the comp, but surely the main issue is, many SL clubs wouldn't have the income to use all of an increased SC. The only thing that will improve players is playing regularly against better opposition.

An increase in salary cap certainly doesn't make exisiting players better but it could well lead us to getting a better calibre of recruit at lower ages if they can see that very good money is available to those who make the first team on a regular basis.
At the moment I'm not convinced of that.
IL has always suggested an increase in the SC in line with inflation.
If that had been in place from the start of the SC then we would be heading for a figure far larger than we have now.
The NRL has a far larger talent pool than us and a far larger salary cap.
With IL/Rads/SW eyeing London and the talent pool down there they maybe going someway to enlarge our scope for recruitment.

How many potential players of all ages don't even look at RL because of the low pay? We have no idea how many potential players just don't pursue a career in RL as they can earn more in a regular career outside the game. Then we have players like Owen Farrell and George Ford in Union who might fancy a crack at the game one day probably never will as they would take a massive pay cut. The poor pay relative to other sports must be a disincentive to players of all ages.

As to many SL clubs not having the income to pay to a higher cap, they would have has if the RFL had the brains to put the TV contract out to tender or even not having done so accepted the Sky money should go to the SL teams only. Even with the current new deal that would have doubled the salary cap to £3.6m fully finding the clubs. Instead they have kept it at £1.8m with (all SL clubs fully funded) in order to adopt this "whole game approach".

It's stupid because there just isn't enough money for a twenty odd team pro game as we see given half the teams are still effectively semi pro still paying to a lower cap.

There are lots of ways you could improve the situation without raising the cap willy-nilly. You could introduce significantly bigger discounts on home-grown talent than there are now. You could also look at marquee player discounts and even Club England type top-up payments.

I don't think even these adjustments would be a full solution, but to simply do nothing in response to this crisis is ludicrous. (I agree about playing better opposition more regularly, but there's a touch of irony in that Saints played a team who trashed them last weekend, and two of the best British forwards around were in the opposition).

Years ago I was accused of scaremongering when I said I feared our game would decline if we just accepted the cap was here to stay forever and that it would never be changed. Okay, British RL still has its professional tier, but a lot of our best players are no longer in it. As someone else said, it's now a case of 'when' our best new players will leave and not 'if'. And, if Joe Burgess is anything to go by, the age is coming down rapidly. How long will we have had him for - two seasons (one of which, judging by this one so far, he's doing a Brian Carney with his head elsewhere).

Is it still possible for the cap to be challenged legally? If so, I wonder how long before that happens. Because it may be the only outcome, and I doubt any of us really want that.

I find myself agreeing with DaveO, which is unusual, to say the least. Increasing the cap without a corresponding increase in income is folly. The problem is not the cap but the fact that the sport as a whole simply does not bring in enough money, whether that's TV income, other sponsorship, or gate money.

On TV sports viewing figures (at club level, at least; internationals are another matter), we are second only to football,. but that is not reflected in TV income.

DaveO is spot on...

Do you have any figures to back that assertion up Geoff?

I'd like to think you are right but am a little sceptical.

The figures are a little hard to find, but this article from last year is fairly typical:

[urlhttp://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2014/may/08/rugby-league-union-tv[/url

Cheers, I had a little search myself but it is hard to find any figures for Sky. It does seem that International Sport gets the highest viewing figures (Cricket, Union) whilst Darts is incredibly popular. But in a straight fight between club Rugby Union and League, League wins hands down.

We really need to go back to Sky and look to renegotiate the deal that was agreed.
Not sure what the viewing figures were for the wcc but if they were a success then this is something that we need to try and take advantage of.
I've come to the conclusion that unless Sky stump up more then within the next couple of years there may not be a SL competition worth televising. They will know this we just need the balls to restart discussions on longer funding. Let's give Sky the Challenge Cup or even jettison that competition to give Sky exclusivity for screening RL but for considerably more funding. Let's at least try and think out of the proverbial box.
The problem for me is that we have no one within the RL or SL who has sufficient vision or energy to drag the game forward. Who is they guy we brought in as chairman. I can't even remember his name let alone what he stands for and how he plans to address the perennial issues of lack of funding and a non existent international game.

Knee Jerk

Not going to happen. I'd like to think Sky might realise to keep the quality of their second highest watched club sport they need to fund it better but I can't see it.



I think you are right. What we need is someone who could go the to likes of BT Sport and say "you give me a shed load of cash and I will give you an NRL-like competition". Instead we have the Fat Controller who was instrumental in locking us to Sky for what is it, five years?

The RFL needs a clear out. Most major organisations move CEO's and what not on after a relatively short period to reinvigorate things. The RFL certainly needs that.

Positive from last night. Two things.

John Bateman running down and tackling a Cas player who had made a break in the last five

Then exorting his teammates to form a scrum around him with two minutes to go.

Great attitude from our standout player in an otherwise miserable performance.

The salary cap has brought teams closer together, no doubt, but it seems more by slowing improvement for those at top rather than speeding up those at the bottom. As part of a group of initiatives (meaningful internationals, bias toward home nation players, better TV rights and more), the cap could withstand a small increase (2 or 3%).

Admittedly not a leading player, but Mark Edmondson left Saints for a job that offered better return. This may have been immediately, more long term or simply because it was in America (I think). There will be many of you on here who earn as much as some first teamers now, but more importantly, by the time they are thirty and looking for a new career, they've missed out on ten years of potential ladder climbing.

From memory, these have gone to union in last decade or so:

Sam Burgess, Kyle Eastmond, Joel Tomkins, Chris Ashton, Lee Smith, Brian Carney, Andy Farrell, Anthony Sullivan, Chev Walker, one of the Mylers, the big Pryce and before that the very high profile Iestyn Harris and Jason Robinson. This doesn't include foreigners (Henry Paul, Champagne Hape, Freddie Tuilagi, Maurie F'asavalu) and no doubt there are many I've missed in all the above categories.

And there's no real way of knowing whom we never had to start with (Farrell?).

It may seem short term but salary is important and must be worth flogging out one's guts

he runs a gym for MMA in Aus

Positives, we won-Mossop.
Negatives, still look clueless going forward

....and backward and sideways.
Bizarre feeling being [ireally[/i cross at a win.

They looked tired before half-time.
Handling was dire.
Bowen is static & seems to be scared of getting hit.
Play-the-ball was glacial

I'm glad they didn't rise to Hull trying to rile them early on
A few of the "seniors" stood up, but were let down by poor decision making & sloppy play from too many others.

Still, 2 points. An ugly win. Hopefully, lessons might be learned.

again