Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:16 pm  

St pete wrote:

I thought jammer was giving a we are just as good as anyone speech.

That is exactly what I thought too. I'm sure he said at one stage that they (Wigan) were just a load of f****** cheats! (or words to that effect!)

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:18 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

If we ever take the field against those Goons with a full strength lineup we would murder them.

The if is the key here. We never seem to get to the if moment these days. When was the last time we fielded a full team? This season especially it is so frustrating and disappointing because we have a coach who is coaching open rugby league, and doing it well, and who has a great crop of players at his disposal, even though some of them are a bit on the slow side. Damn shame.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:20 pm  

I honestly think the is nothing between saints, Wigan, Warrington and maybe hudds when all at full strength.

This super league will go to who keeps there squad fit.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:21 pm  

Wellens was excellent in that 1st half. The fact that you're slagging him off shows you know sod all about the game.

I'm proper proud of the boys today. They showed fantastic character. Yes, there was a few incidents were players made the wrong decisions but that happens every game & it's easy to be negative and single them out.

Saints were in control in the 1st half but that late challenge on Weeler was a disgrace. Then losing Wellens who wasn't fit for the game anyway (Roycey took a chance) was a hammer blow, which saw Wigan run in 22 unanswered points.

Just to add, Stevie Hampson running across Foster's path as he was taking his conversion was disgusting behaviour.

It might have been a loss on the score board but that was a victory for character. Well done Saints.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:22 pm  

St pete wrote:

This super league will go to who keeps there squad fit.

Last year's did too. We're doomed

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:24 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Last year's did too. We're doomed

If we have a Nearly full strength side going into the play offs then we got as good chance as anyone.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:41 pm  

St pete wrote:

If we have a Nearly full strength side going into the play offs then we got as good chance as anyone.

That is assuming our injuries don't undermine our season to the degree that we don't make the playoffs. That could happen.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:43 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

That is assuming our injuries don't undermine our season to the degree that we don't make the playoffs. That could happen.

It could happen and anything is possible but I think we will defo make the top 8.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 9:14 pm  

MUGWUMP....... you cant blame Shenton or Lomax for trying something different in a game that was tighter than a ducks @rse. Lomax is genuine class and ok it went to Sam T but had it have gone the otherside it would have been a game breaker,sometimes they come off,sometimes they dont but dont coach natural ability out of a young un.

Re: Graham's necessary bollocking : Fri Apr 22, 2011 9:40 pm  

The kick from lomax did not let Tomkins run 40 - 50 meters, that was the lack of tackling.


If we are going to apportion blame, lets trace it all the way back to some idiot picking up a rugby ball 150 years ago.

We can all pick moments in time to say if and but, but in the end what happened happened. Long could have done something equally as stupid, lomax may choose differently next time.

Unless they get the experience and the chance to make those choices then they never become the finished article.

The big loss for me was Gaskell, he has been our main positional kicker and without him, alot of our kicks where ineffective.