Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 2:49 pm  

LFC Saint wrote:

http://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/sport/11627409.Sean_Long_given_task_of_tackling_Saints__defence/

Thanks

Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 3:08 pm  

Judder Man wrote: Walmsley 230 metres and Sav 150 metres were the over the ground munchers, there were only Greenwood and LMS helping out with the no of carries. Mose didn,t do much, as I noticed most of the time he was on we were defending. Think Giants did a job on Roby stopped him making metres but he did 50 tackles. Quinlan and Burns the missed tackles offenders this week. http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/11945 I didn't think it was possible for a half to be more static than Danny Brough - but Walsh's average gain of 1.83 yards was absolutely abysmal. I think this really does strike at the heart of the problem. When Walsh was fully fit he presented a genuine threat attacking the line. He wasn't rapid. But he did have good speed off the mark and defences were never sure whether to commit or hang back. Right now they know that Walsh can barely put one leg in front of the other. Which means they only have to mark up squarely and whatever threat Walsh presents is completely nullified. People are ragging on Cunningham because of Saints' style of play. But I really do think he's been hamstrung his halfback options. Given that we've only had one functioning halfback all season quite frankly I'm amazed we are where we are.

Judder Man wrote: Walmsley 230 metres and Sav 150 metres were the over the ground munchers, there were only Greenwood and LMS helping out with the no of carries. Mose didn,t do much, as I noticed most of the time he was on we were defending. Think Giants did a job on Roby stopped him making metres but he did 50 tackles. Quinlan and Burns the missed tackles offenders this week. http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/11945 I didn't think it was possible for a half to be more static than Danny Brough - but Walsh's average gain of 1.83 yards was absolutely abysmal. I think this really does strike at the heart of the problem. When Walsh was fully fit he presented a genuine threat attacking the line. He wasn't rapid. But he did have good speed off the mark and defences were never sure whether to commit or hang back. Right now they know that Walsh can barely put one leg in front of the other. Which means they only have to mark up squarely and whatever threat Walsh presents is completely nullified. People are ragging on Cunningham because of Saints' style of play. But I really do think he's been hamstrung his halfback options. Given that we've only had one functioning halfback all season quite frankly I'm amazed we are where we are.

Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 3:18 pm  

you lot are typical of supporters who have grown up on success, you are having a bad run of things at the moment for sure, but there's some right knee jerking and dummy spitting going on on here lately.
i seem to remember more or less the same thing last year and look how that worked out!
you're not exactly struggling are you? 4th in the table and only a few weeks ago you were top or only a point or so off it, it's not like you've struggled to make the 8 is it?

you can't win every game and you can't just win trophies all the time, sometimes you have to accept that you might have a season or two where you don't win anything.
crying and whinging when you don't win every week is a sign of glory supporting.

hopefully we'll finish you off in the semi's

Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 3:46 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

I didn't think it was possible for a half to be more static than Danny Brough - but Walsh's average gain of 1.83 yards was absolutely abysmal.

Did anyone watch the Sky post match analysis with Danny Brough doing the honours, he came across very well and explained how they exploited the saints weakness in our last 20 metres. He and the ball receiver knew what options they had on offer, really good insight into his smart play and making things happen compared to Walsh and Burns who can't make a good half back between them at the moment.

Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 3:57 pm  

meast wrote:

you lot are typical of supporters who have grown up on success, you are having a bad run of things at the moment for sure, but there's some right knee jerking and dummy spitting going on on here lately.
i seem to remember more or less the same thing last year and look how that worked out!
you're not exactly struggling are you? 4th in the table and only a few weeks ago you were top or only a point or so off it, it's not like you've struggled to make the 8 is it?

you can't win every game and you can't just win trophies all the time, sometimes you have to accept that you might have a season or two where you don't win anything.
crying and whinging when you don't win every week is a sign of glory supporting.

hopefully we'll finish you off in the semi's

This isn't Huddersfield mate. Losing is not something acceptable here. Losing successive home games to the likes of Hull and Huddersfield is positively crisis time and not good enough.

You run off back to mediocrity.

Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:12 pm  

SLS wrote:

This isn't Huddersfield mate. Losing is not something acceptable here. Losing successive home games to the likes of Hull and Huddersfield is positively crisis time and not good enough.

You run off back to mediocrity.

Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:25 pm  

Judder Man wrote:

Did anyone watch the Sky post match analysis with Danny Brough doing the honours, he came across very well and explained how they exploited the saints weakness in our last 20 metres. He and the ball receiver knew what options they had on offer, really good insight into his smart play and making things happen compared to Walsh and Burns who can't make a good half back between them at the moment.

I don't think either half isn't trying. I just don't think either is physically capable of doing what they used to.

Prior to Walsh's leg injury and Burns' problems at Hull KR both had enough speed and acceleration to do what was needed.

But neither are the players they once were. Walsh is still pretty young and he might return to his former abilities. But Burns' legs look like they are as much to do with age as anything else. Whatever the case - he's not going to get any quicker.

The top, top players can adjust their games as their bodies begin to break down. But a lot of players just can't handle the fact that they can no longer do what they have successfully for the last - say ten or more years.

The problem is - right now we have FOUR absolutely key players (on good money) who we can't be sure won't amount to dead weight next season - Walsh, McDonnell, Lomax & Burns.

That's a bad situation to be in.

Re: clueless! : Fri Aug 21, 2015 7:34 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

I don't think either half isn't trying. I just don't think either is physically capable of doing what they used to.

Prior to Walsh's leg injury and Burns' problems at Hull KR both had enough speed and acceleration to do what was needed.

But neither are the players they once were. Walsh is still pretty young and he might return to his former abilities. But Burns' legs look like they are as much to do with age as anything else. Whatever the case - he's not going to get any quicker.

The top, top players can adjust their games as their bodies begin to break down. But a lot of players just can't handle the fact that they can no longer do what they have successfully for the last - say ten or more years.

The problem is - right now we have FOUR absolutely key players (on good money) who we can't be sure won't amount to dead weight next season - Walsh, McDonnell, Lomax & Burns.

That's a bad situation to be in.

I bet Sean Long could look them both in the eyes and say: "I might be as thick as a plank, but my rugby brain is far superior than the dumb plays you two are coughing up at the moment"