Re: 30 -0 : Sat Sep 15, 2012 8:53 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

We have been to the playoffs every season since, when? 2006? Or did we get into the playoffs in 2005? I can't remember. Anyway, obviously since 2006 at the latest.

In that time we have had Anderson, Potter, Simmons and now Rush as coaches. Clearly our ability to play play off rugby is not simply a coaching matter otherwise we wouldn't be so consistent across so many coaches.

IMO it's a mentality. What the players showed tonight was what they generally haven't showed this season: a desire to play. I think the last time we saw Saints play anything near that kind of rugby was against Leeds at Langtree Park. I feel like I've been duped out of my season ticket after the trugid rot I've had to watch. I might not bother paying out next year and just turn up for the play offs, like Saints have done.

We can only hope!!!!

Re: 30 -0 : Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:00 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

We have been to the playoffs every season since, when? 2006? Or did we get into the playoffs in 2005? I can't remember. Anyway, obviously since 2006 at the latest.

In that time we have had Anderson, Potter, Simmons and now Rush as coaches. Clearly our ability to play play off rugby is not simply a coaching matter otherwise we wouldn't be so consistent across so many coaches.

IMO it's a mentality. What the players showed tonight was what they generally haven't showed this season: a desire to play. I think the last time we saw Saints play anything near that kind of rugby was against Leeds at Langtree Park. I feel like I've been duped out of my season ticket after the trugid rot I've had to watch. I might not bother paying out next year and just turn up for the play offs, like Saints have done.

Hang on a minute, we've only just turned up in the play offs?

We've beat Wigan, Leeds, wolves, Catalan away thus year, we drew at hull and we have finished 3rd!

Finishing 3rd doesn't mean we've just showed up.

Re: 30 -0 : Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:30 pm  

I kinda get it both ways. I think Rush has exceeded expectations. We have also had some very dull moments. It's been effective rugby this year. Players picked on their defensive qualities.


We've all bagged him for not picking gaskell etc. Me included.

There is an arguement to be had about whether playing conservative rugby in the weekly rounds does not help sell season tickets the life blood of RL clubs. But tonight is not the night. Tonight has justified Rush and he should take the credit for tonight as that's the way he has coached the team all year and for playoff Rugby tight defense, is the key.

Well done Rush.

Re: 30 -0 : Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:29 pm  

Ninja saint wrote:

Finishing 3rd doesn't mean we've just showed up.

It does when we are talking about style of play which, if you'd read my post, you will clearly see that is what I was talking about.

Re: 30 -0 : Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:30 pm  

Top Saint wrote:

We can only hope!!!!

Indeed. It's good to know you wish the club's support and finances to be reduced.

Re: 30 -0 : Sun Sep 16, 2012 4:12 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

We have been to the playoffs every season since, when? 2006? Or did we get into the playoffs in 2005? I can't remember. Anyway, obviously since 2006 at the latest.

In that time we have had Anderson, Potter, Simmons and now Rush as coaches. Clearly our ability to play play off rugby is not simply a coaching matter otherwise we wouldn't be so consistent across so many coaches.

IMO it's a mentality. What the players showed tonight was what they generally haven't showed this season: a desire to play. I think the last time we saw Saints play anything near that kind of rugby was against Leeds at Langtree Park. I feel like I've been duped out of my season ticket after the trugid rot I've had to watch. I might not bother paying out next year and just turn up for the play offs, like Saints have done.

You would prefer to watch a team that plays great stuff all year and falls to pieces in the playoffs? Try Warrington then.

Re: 30 -0 : Sun Sep 16, 2012 6:45 am  

I get the point about playing more entertaining rugby. It's not just Saints fan on her own there, and not just Internet posters either.

We where great last night, but although finals are important for players they are not the life blood of a club, weeks 1 - 27 are the week that bring in the big money for the club from the 14k that go regular.

If they are bored then clubs would suffer if that fell away and fans only turned up to watch the entertaining games in the playoffs. I know some people will go week in week out regardless of entertainment value. But thousands also will maybe think twice.

In a way its a seperate arguement to last nights game. In playoff rugby you do play tighter style of game, but the weekly rounds are open to a bit more in the way of chancing your arm.

It's been tougher for Rush as he had a huge handicap to cover at the start of his reign so you can see why he would choose to go the route of minimal errors and a narrower game, but it's a balance that I hope we can sway a little more to getting the ball wider earlier next year.

Re: 30 -0 : Sun Sep 16, 2012 8:40 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

I get the point about playing more entertaining rugby. It's not just Saints fan on her own there, and not just Internet posters either.

We where great last night, but although finals are important for players they are not the life blood of a club, weeks 1 - 27 are the week that bring in the big money for the club from the 14k that go regular.

If they are bored then clubs would suffer if that fell away and fans only turned up to watch the entertaining games in the playoffs. I know some people will go week in week out regardless of entertainment value. But thousands also will maybe think twice.

In a way its a seperate arguement to last nights game. In playoff rugby you do play tighter style of game, but the weekly rounds are open to a bit more in the way of chancing your arm.

It's been tougher for Rush as he had a huge handicap to cover at the start of his reign so you can see why he would choose to go the route of minimal errors and a narrower game, but it's a balance that I hope we can sway a little more to getting the ball wider earlier next year.

Can anyone really link entertaining rugby to gates? When was the last time saints played entertaining rugby? I'd say the millward era. Have the gates suffered since then? No! If Anything they have improved. A few fickle fans will use this as an excuse to not renew their season tickets, but the vast majority will be back next year. Gates are more influenced by what happens around the game, and whether the club is successful.

Re: 30 -0 : Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:07 am  

SomersetSaint wrote:

Can anyone really link entertaining rugby to gates? When was the last time saints played entertaining rugby? I'd say the millward era. Have the gates suffered since then? No! If Anything they have improved. A few fickle fans will use this as an excuse to not renew their season tickets, but the vast majority will be back next year. Gates are more influenced by what happens around the game, and whether the club is successful.

Fair point.

Re: 30 -0 : Sun Sep 16, 2012 12:06 pm  

SomersetSaint wrote:

Can anyone really link entertaining rugby to gates? When was the last time saints played entertaining rugby? I'd say the millward era. Have the gates suffered since then? No! If Anything they have improved. A few fickle fans will use this as an excuse to not renew their season tickets, but the vast majority will be back next year. Gates are more influenced by what happens around the game, and whether the club is successful.

Consistent evidence comprehensively proves that the top 3 driving factors for attendences in SL at any given moment in time are: the overall "buzz" surrounding the game itself, the innate interest in RL in the area and the quality of facilities at the stadium. On-field performance is a minor factor. Fact.