Dux wrote:
I think our forwards stood up and went toe to toe with the Giants. LMS was miles better than he's been for weeks. However:
1. Our dinosaur back three must have been a delightful sight for Brough. Every time he turned us by kicking early in the tackle count it took them hours to get back. Quite why Gardner was picked ahead of Makinson is beyond me.
2. Our last tackle plays were poor. There were one or two decent bombs from Wilkin towards the end, but most of our kicks failed to apply any pressure at all. Understandable given the change in personnel in the half backs, but, again, I'm not sure why Brown decided to try a new 6 at the same time as giving a young loanee with approximately 4 days at the club his debut in the 7 shirt. A pairing of Wilkin and O'Brien would have made much more sense.
3. Our attack looks like it is completely made up on the spot. There is absolutely no structure whatsoever. Our best moments came when we managed to get the ball to Manu and see what happens. An (unnecessarily) untried half back partnership goes some way to explaining that, but even bearing that in mind we just look completely un-coached with the ball in hand.
4. Our edge-defence is similarly amateurish. Percy made some poor decisions, but that's to be expected from an 18 year old. But it wasn't just him. We are far too easy to break down.
I'm not going to make any flip judgements on Brown at this stage, but I'm becoming increasingly concerned.
I think I'll go with you, Dux.
Although you could look at it as a 25-16 defeat away to one of the season's form teams, which doesn't sounds too bad, however, last night summed up everything that is frustratingly wrong with Saints at the moment - the fact we could win territory but not do anything about it is awfully frustrating.
The pack was good. Bouyed by the return of Roby (who was very good), we took the game to the very formidable Huddersfield pack. Manu and Puletua were real handfuls, LMS and Soliola played well, Clough got some good yards and Walmsley was his usual self. However, this seemingly good point is where my problems begin. The fact that we obviously have a lot of good players and the basis of a good team, but are still falling short because of glaring problems in certain areas.
In the first half, despite our forwards laying a decent platform, we we chasing the game - The difference being the kicking game, the kick chase and speed of retun. Of these three points we were inferior to Huuds which translated directly into the territory game.
In the second half, we had so much posession and territory, but couldn't capitalise or create space out wide.
I am not a fan of 3 pivots. Its inefficient IMO and the selection of Turner as one of them - he's been going well in the centre, but is transofrmed into a crab when given the ball playing responsibilty. The only reason I can think this is a good idea is tomake up for Wellens's lake of ability to play as a pivot, using him more as a forward in attack.
Why loan a halfback in O'Brien and then make him play second (or third even) fiddle to Wilkin and Turner? How did Turner end up kicking the ball so many times?
Our defence outwide is poor. There's no way to dress it up. Hohaia in particular seem a liability, but we look really clueless when defending at times.
Wellens, despite his resurgence against Leeds, showed how muich his game hinders the team. Slow to return the ball meaning we struggled for territory and woeful in the attacking line. I think that, in attack, Makinson
has looked a little limited at #1 in terms of creating for his outside, but if we're not going with him, we should be using Swift or even Charnock.
Gardner...What can we say, takes the ball up bravely, trips over his own feet and knocks himslef out on Mullally's shoulder. To agree with ther posters, why Makinson, who has shown good form lately was left out for him is baffling.
Hohaia...Awful. Just Awful.
Wilkin... I'm afriad for every good thing he does, he lets him self down with something stupid. Whether it be a silly pen at the play the ball or letting Brough walk past him to set up Ferguson's try. I appriciate he's playing out of position at half back, so may deserve a little bit of sympathy with the playmaking role, but if ou give him that, you cannot also excuse the weekly penalties he gives away after being dominated in contact when tackling.
If, as I suspect we will, we insist on shoehorning Wilkin into the side no matter who we've got available it will be a similar mistake to keeping Wellens in the team past his sell by date. We should flog him to Salford for next season.
O'Brien..Why loan a half to bring all the things we're missing and not use him? Sticking him on one side marginalised him for the sake of persisting with Wilkin as the main man.
Turner...Why move him from centre where he's been playing well to a pivot role he looks lost in. His kicks were pretty poor.
There are positives. I've already mentioned the pack doing very well. Now, there is the theory that if Lomax had been playing #1, we could have well got another 3 tries or so and the game may have been winnable (such is the effect he can have on our attack). Whether Hudds would have shut up shop in quite the same way if that was happening, I'm not sure.
We were also guilty of many more silly mistakes than Hudds, knock on at the play the ball, kicks out on the full and generally looking like we didn't know what we were doing in attack out wide (or indeed defence).
So, what basic changes do I want?
Only 1 of the old men to play in the back three - IMO Meli is clearly the one who brings the most positives to the table.
Ball playing full back. Whilst Lomax is injured, let swift do it, I say. He's shown enough fo me to have confidence that he can handle the defensive duties whilst bring an awful lot to the table in attack. Reports also suggest he's really excelled at Whitehaven in that role. This will allow us to go with...
2 half backs, not three. O'Brien and Wilkin would be the most logical, although Danny Yates or Dougie Charnock may well be worth a punt. When Lomax is back, I'd perhaps look at moving Swift to 6.
That is a good pack. Thompson looked a bit green, but it was a tough game for a youngster. Perhaps spell him with Greenwood for the rest of the season. Add a proper 13 and we'll be alright on that front, as long a Robes stays fit.
