Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:56 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

In fact, if it goes Pete Tong then Keiron could have his godlike status well and truly destroyed.

Whenever I hear the name "Alex Murphy" I never think of the player widely regarded as the greatest of all time in either code who spearheaded the rise of my club from utter mediocrity to becoming the greatest club in the game. I instead can only ever think of the beleaguered failure sitting on the sidelines shouting ineffectually at his team as they were overwhelmed and babbling semi-coherently in post-match interviews about it all. Please let this not ever happen to KC too...

Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:59 pm  

St pete wrote:

Our defence has been crap!

Even the bulls cut us up at times and they had 10 players out injured and their main attacking player sammut out suspended.

I'd we defend like we did last week or they way we did against hull then I predict Wigan and Warrington would put 40+ on us.

The defence is all at sea, massive overlaps and our goal line defence has been as bad as I've seen since I started watching saints.

Did you watch Saints under Millward? Presumably not!

Clearly you didn't watch the Hull and Bradford games either. Our defence was much improved.

Bradford's missing players are worse than the ones they had on the pitch against us (bar Sammut). They could do with their missing players remaining absent for the rest of the season. They may get somewhere then.

As for Wigan and Warrington (and Leeds) they are simply better teams than we are. Well, Warrington and Leeds are anyway. It wouldn't matter how good our defence was, they have the players and the experience to undermine it. Particularly if Meli is on the wing on Sunday. Christmas again for Sinfield!

Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:04 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

Whenever I hear the name "Alex Murphy" I never think of the all-time great player who spearheaded the rise of my club from utter mediocrity to becoming the greatest club in the game. I instead can only ever think of the beleaguered failure sitting on the sidelines shouting ineffectually at his team as they were overwhelmed and babbling semi-coherently in post-match interviews about it all. Please let this not ever happen to KC too...

Exactly. I do hope McManus realises just what pressure he has heaped upon his home boys and what failure might do to at least one of them.

Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:09 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Did you watch Saints under Millward? Presumably not!

Clearly you didn't watch the Hull and Bradford games either. Our defence was much improved.

Bradford's missing players are worse than the ones they had on the pitch against us (bar Sammut). They could do with their missing players remaining absent for the rest of the season. They may get somewhere then.

As for Wigan and Warrington (and Leeds) they are simply better teams than we are. Well, Warrington and Leeds are anyway. It wouldn't matter how good our defence was, they have the players and the experience to undermine it. Particularly if Meli is on the wing on Sunday. Christmas again for Sinfield!

Why harp back to the millward era which was god knows his many years back. I watched saints long before millward arrived.

The defence was still a total mess against bulls and hull. The is no organisation at all and a good attacking team will destroy us if we defend like that.

We are averaging aprox 23 points against per game Which isn't good enough when our coach stated he'd wants it at 14 per game.

Any team that moves the ball wide causes is trouble big time.

Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:12 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Exactly. I do hope McManus realises just what pressure he has heaped upon his home boys and what failure might do to at least one of them.

Do you think Mr. Teflon will accept any responsibility?

Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:14 pm  

St pete wrote:

Why harp back to the millward era which was god knows his many years back. I watched saints long before millward arrived.

So then you should know the difference between the crap defence you claim we had and good defence. However, you appear not to and so you cannot have watched us under Millward.

The defence was still a total mess against bulls and hull. The is no organisation at all and a good attacking team will destroy us if we defend like that.

It didn't look a total mess. It looked a lot more organised than in the two games when we conceded big points. And even in those games it was solely our goal line defence that let us down. But then we have two very eager defenders missing from our team this year and so the others couldn't hide anymore.

We are averaging aprox 23 points against per game Which isn't good enough when our coach stated he'd wants it at 14 per game.

The coach said 16 per game to give a good chance of winning the GF, and he was right. And of course our average was high: we conceded massively on two occasions.

Any team that moves the ball wide causes is trouble big time.

Obviously but there is little new in that. It's called having weak wingers. The teams have been clearly targeting Foster's side and it has worked for them. They don't go so much to Makinson's side because Makinson is better defensively.

Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:14 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Do you think Mr. Teflon will accept any responsibility?

Nope.

Re: Rush and KC : Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:43 pm  

St pete wrote:

Our defence has been crap!

Even the bulls cut us up at times and they had 10 players out injured and their main attacking player sammut out suspended.

I'd we defend like we did last week or they way we did against hull then I predict Wigan and Warrington would put 40+ on us.

The defence is all at sea, massive overlaps and our goal line defence has been as bad as I've seen since I started watching saints.

St Pete.Is there anything you see as a positive with our team at the moment.I have lived through a few of these times.We are a fantastic club and have been all of my life and I am 60.I expect us to be the same for the rest of my life.We will come through this period,we have some fabulous young kids that are now playing in SL.I like some of the things you put on this board but you are so negative at the moment.I gather you did not like Simons.I also think he was part of the problem.He is not with us now,I know you are happy about that.I will put my trust in the people that are running the club at the moment.Belive me we have had some real prats running Saints at times and we have survived them.We are at the begining of a new era at the club and probably the most exciting of my time watching Saints.You carry on having your say and do it with the passion I see you have for the club.

Re: Rush and KC : Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:28 am  

saint mac wrote:

St Pete.Is there anything you see as a positive with our team at the moment.I have lived through a few of these times.We are a fantastic club and have been all of my life and I am 60.I expect us to be the same for the rest of my life.We will come through this period,we have some fabulous young kids that are now playing in SL.I like some of the things you put on this board but you are so negative at the moment.I gather you did not like Simons.I also think he was part of the problem.He is not with us now,I know you are happy about that.I will put my trust in the people that are running the club at the moment.Belive me we have had some real prats running Saints at times and we have survived them.We are at the begining of a new era at the club and probably the most exciting of my time watching Saints.You carry on having your say and do it with the passion I see you have for the club.

Thanks.

Yes I do see positives still at the club like the young lads we have in Gaskell, lomax, foster, wheeler, makinson etc but young lads of this age don't have the confidence to go out and express themselves and that's when a a good structure is needed and organisation and it's clear Royce had no structure or organistsion.

I'm not saying we will be back to playing proper rugby league straight away now Royce has gone but from knowing some of the saints lads I think they agree that McManus was correct in sacking Royce because we couldn't go the way we was.

Re: Rush and KC : Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:44 am  

St pete wrote:

Yes I do see positives still at the club like the young lads we have in Gaskell, lomax, foster, wheeler, makinson etc but young lads of this age don't have the confidence to go out and express themselves and that's when a a good structure is needed and organisation and it's clear Royce had no structure or organistsion.

That's not clear at all. What IS clear is that there was no on field leader.

I'm not saying we will be back to playing proper rugby league straight away now Royce has gone but from knowing some of the saints lads I think they agree that McManus was correct in sacking Royce because we couldn't go the way we was.

Whereas Wello seemed to more than suggest that the young guys were upset at the loss of Royce. After all, Royce showed faith in them and gave them their opportunities in the first team on a consistent basis.

Everyone seems to have forgotten all of a sudden that we had already lost Jammer and Robes was out injured for three weeks. That leaves nobody organising up front.