Re: Not bad - Seriously : Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:44 pm  

Rob Wire wrote:

Now this is a little confusing, in the past as you know we have also had enough time on the saints line to convert that territory into points but we have failed on numerous occasions.

Now the media and your own fans put the above down to great Saints try line defence, so basically when the opposition does the same to you they are not worthy, its all down to Saints short comings in front of the try line and nothing to do with how good the opposition have improved in a game against Saints at defending their own line.

Your defense was fantastic. No one with a brain would dispute that. We didn't put it under any real pressure though, so at least part of the blame for the 0 for Saints at HT goes to the attackers.

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:48 pm  

The Chair Maker wrote:

Part of a scrum halves job is to bark out the orders to set up the plays.
If the scrum half is just saying you have it, then there is not much the other players can do.
Scrum halves also need to attack the line, as that causes defensive indecision. Kyle never did that at all. Whether its mental of physical he is not currently at the races.

As for Gaskell I thought he had an half decent first half, but tired bit and then dropped a pas or two in the pouring rain.

This in a nutshell,over 60 minutes before he took the line on just isnt right.
I can excuse players not playing well it happens to even the best,what i cant excuse is not giving 100%

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:51 pm  

Rob Wire wrote:

Now this is a little confusing, in the past as you know we have also had enough time on the saints line to convert that territory into points but we have failed on numerous occasions.

Now the media and your own fans put the above down to great Saints try line defence, so basically when the opposition does the same to you they are not worthy, its all down to Saints short comings in front of the try line and nothing to do with how good the opposition have improved in a game against Saints at defending their own line.

Are You stupid? Where have I said it was just our attack being poor?

The Warrington defence was awesome but with the amount of ball we had on your line we'd be expected to score.

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:04 am  

We won tonights game down the middle.... nothing eastmond could have done about it. Our forwards dominated and our defence smothered a predictable attack. The short ball to pauleta didnt work (i would have him at wire in a heartbeat though) and you seemed to struggle for ideas after that.

your scapegoating of eastmond is a bit poor to be honest.... he wasnt that bad.

Your main problem was that graham got owned early.... he then spat his dummy out and spent the rest of the game being second best in the tackle.... the rest of your forwards seemed to follow suit.... i thought soliola would be one of your biggest threats and he was non existent.... graham was smashed by monaghan and Carvell and your pack seemed to give up.

LMS worked hard... but he was a little young for the intensity... he will be a great signing though.

You need pryce back quickly..... in all honesty it looks like you need a new 6 & 7 long term.... and a 13

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:05 am  

morleys_deckchair wrote:

We won tonights game down the middle.... nothing eastmond could have done about it. Our forwards dominated and our defence smothered a predictable attack. The short ball to pauleta didnt work (i would have him at wire in a heartbeat though) and you seemed to struggle for ideas after that.

your scapegoating of eastmond is a bit poor to be honest.... he wasnt that bad.

Your main problem was that graham got owned early.... he then spat his dummy out and spent the rest of the game being second best in the tackle.... the rest of your forwards seemed to follow suit.... i thought soliola would be one of your biggest threats and he was non existent.... graham was smashed by monaghan and Carvell and your pack seemed to give up.

LMS worked hard... but he was a little young for the intensity... he will be a great signing though.

You need pryce back quickly..... in all honesty it looks like you need a new 6 & 7 long term.... and a 13

If you dominated us so much down the middle, how come we had so much territory in the first half? Where did all the metres come from as I don't remember Warrington making many mistakes and I don't remember us getting loads of penalties either?

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:10 am  

morleys_deckchair wrote:

We won tonights game down the middle.... nothing eastmond could have done about it.

Spot on fella!!!

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:11 am  

Saddened! wrote:

If you dominated us so much down the middle, how come we had so much territory in the first half? Where did all the metres come from as I don't remember Warrington making many mistakes and I don't remember us getting loads of penalties either?

you got lots of sets from good attacking plays and mistakes at the wrong times.... we then shut up shop and you got nothing.

We made loads of yards with the ball... your forwards never looked like breaking us when it mattered.

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:16 am  

Saddened! wrote:

Strange game in all. Wire deserved their win, but I wonder if any of their fans feel it was a tad anti-climactic?

Yes for several reasons

1. It wasn't at home and it wasn't at KR.
2. The Saints side didn't have Long and Cunningham in it.
3. After winning two Challenge Cups the excitement of winning a one off league game has diminished. When we were garbage then a win against a good side was as good as we got so when other clubs fans would say "pfft they think it's their Cup Final", but if you never get in big games, that sort of thing is the cup final, its like is someone like Fulham beats Man U their fans go crazy.
4. All through the game I never felt we would lose, which took away some of the edge of the usual Wire v Saints games.

If we'd have beaten Saints a few years ago in a tight game it would have been more exciting way of ending the losing streak.

As for now I feel like I did as a cricket fan when England finally won a series against the West Indies in 2000. If we'd won in 1993/94 or 1995, it would have been great, but it had that anti-climactic feel of something well overdue that had an inevitability about finally happening.

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:01 am  

sally cinnamon wrote:

Yes for several reasons

1. It wasn't at home and it wasn't at KR.
2. The Saints side didn't have Long and Cunningham in it.
3. After winning two Challenge Cups the excitement of winning a one off league game has diminished. When we were garbage then a win against a good side was as good as we got so when other clubs fans would say "pfft they think it's their Cup Final", but if you never get in big games, that sort of thing is the cup final, its like is someone like Fulham beats Man U their fans go crazy.
4. All through the game I never felt we would lose, which took away some of the edge of the usual Wire v Saints games.

If we'd have beaten Saints a few years ago in a tight game it would have been more exciting way of ending the losing streak.

As for now I feel like I did as a cricket fan when England finally won a series against the West Indies in 2000. If we'd won in 1993/94 or 1995, it would have been great, but it had that anti-climactic feel of something well overdue that had an inevitability about finally happening.

A very honest appraisal.

Re: Not bad - Seriously : Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:20 am  

Thought the whole game was totally surreal. Sans Knowsley Road it was like a weird "who-cares?" attitude had permeated through the crowd. Everywhere I looked there seemed to be people shrugging their shoulders or scratching their heads in absolute perplexity. The team itself was like a thinly visible spectre of former days. The jerseys were there but the flesh, bone and - most importantly - heart were off inhabiting some other dimension.

Set against the backdrop of decades of Saints memories - some glorious, others less-so - it wasn't a terrible performance. We made a few silly mistakes and Warrington, to their credit, played well. Despite the addition of Shenton and the welcome emergence of Gaskell the balance of the side still doesn't look right. Clearly the unedifying saga that is Kyle Eastmond's contract negotiations MUST be resolved before the next match because I think it's plain to see it's having an effect on not just Eastmond' performances but the team's. At the end of the day, the scrum half is the focal point of any side and players need to have total faith in their key playmaker. I didn't see much faith tonight and this was reflected in the display. If Saints don't force Kyle's hand soon I think the potential exists for years of team harmony - which has been just as instrumental to our success as any player - to be put in dire jeopardy. And that simply cannot be allowed to happen.

But more disturbing was the lack of any emotional connection for me. Completely irrespective of the performance - they just didn't seem like my team. Perhaps it's just the ground. I'm not sure. But the disquieting worry is that it isn't...