Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 11:27 am  

Blobbynator wrote:

Good lesson for our young team and a reality check for some aswell.

Souths were brilliant, I don't think we've played a team as strong as that in all my years of watching Saints. It's not that we were very bad, it's that Souths were that good.

The only disappointment is the nil scoreline against our name, but I think they'd have done that to anyone, they were that ruthless last night.

This +1

And the scary thing is i think they could have upped there game further if required.

We are a good Superleague side but not world class. NRL have better sides in there comp that were not on show this weekend that would stuff all superleague easy.

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 11:41 am  

Judder Man wrote:

To give balance, the top 3 teams (1-2-3) in superleague should be playing the bottom play off teams (6-7-8) in NRL. The top 3 teams in the NRL would probably beat an England International side.

Souths would beat any international side at the moment.


Last week we probably made 10-15 unforced errors, and won by 50 points against a team that is paying the full salary cap in the UK. We made 5 or 6 mistakes last night and got punished each time. Souths made a couple of mistakes and we didn't punish them. That tells you all you need to know about the difference in class on show.

In a Super League game, Percival scores both his tries because the cover defence wouldn't get anywhere near to him.

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 11:54 am  

I,m hoping technically the club can learn a lot from this game as a positive. After the score was 14-0, I thought there is no way we are going to win this game so I started to look at the way the Souths played the game technically.

Did anybody notice how there attacking line out changes depending on there position on the field, in there own 25 metres they had a flat attack, in the oppostion 25 metres the attacking line was very deep sometimes the winger back towards the half way line. This meant they where coming at us with speed and space with a world class full back in support, our backline most of the time contest a flat attack in superleague, yesterday our backline was lost in defence and exposed, can we learn from this and technically adopt something similar.

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:20 pm  

I think in a match against most teams, we score on at least 4 occasions last night - Makinson in the corner in the second half, Swift in the first and Percival twice. Souths just scrambled very well in defence when necessary, and on occasions we let them off lightly by not completing sets or kicking on 3rd tackle etc. Our completion was 50-60% throughout the match, I think Souths were something like 85% first half and 93% second half. Without us matching that, it was always going to be a huge struggle. On the topic of Lomax, I think while there are times where his positioning isn't great, it's being made to look worse than it is at the minute as generally we're only dropping back the open side winger and the fullback for most kicks, rather than both wingers. This means Lomax has to be more in a corner, which obviously allows us to cover the threat of running the ball a bit easier, but means there's a hell of a lot more space for them to kick into. For example, for their fourth try, Lomax covers so that Makinson doesn't have to drop back, so that Souths don't have an overlap on the blind side. However as a result, Swift probably needs to push over a bit more to cover for this. Between the two of them they don't communicate enough to cover the big gap, and Souths exploit this, yet how many other teams would have done so? For Souths' first try of the game, Lomax is caught out of position and pretty much in the defensive line. However, this is because Souths got a quick PTB from Inglis, so Masoe is caught on the wrong side of the play the ball - If Lomax wasn't there, there's 4 Souths players on the blind side and 3 attackers (Makinson is out of shot). Reynolds is smart enough to spot this and take advantage, but the previous tackles in the set Lomax was 15m behind the defensive line. The only reason he moved out of position was to cover for other players. On a positive note, our defense in the middle was reasonable solid. We got exposed on the edges - our wingers were okay but Burns and Wilkin made some wrong decisions and Turner was exposed by some good footwork. Through the middle we didn't really give much, despite the obvious talent in the Souths pack. While not at the speed of Souths' kick chases, our chase wasn't too bad despite some pretty ordinary kicking. I think we massively missed Walsh. Obviously for the kicking he would have provided too (and this was a big factor), but also that bit of game sense and direction that Wilkin lacks as a halfback. There was one occasion in the first half where we kicked on the 3rd, about 30-40m out. If it had stayed in it would have been a decent kick, but it went dead and was a huge let off for Souths, while if we had kept the ball till last, we would have been in a pretty decent position to challenge for a kick. Percival looked dangerous on at least 3 occasions but we didn't seem to notice this, instead we sent a lot of traffic down our left at Walker who's obviously a lot more accomplished than Goodwin and Reddy. I think some of our young blokes stood up pretty well - Greenwood, Thompson and Percival in particular. It's just unfortunate that we played what is probably one of the best club rugby league teams ever last night. Lots of lessons to be learned but the effort was there, and Souths would have done that to anyone in Super League on last night's showing, along with lots of NRL clubs.

I think in a match against most teams, we score on at least 4 occasions last night - Makinson in the corner in the second half, Swift in the first and Percival twice. Souths just scrambled very well in defence when necessary, and on occasions we let them off lightly by not completing sets or kicking on 3rd tackle etc. Our completion was 50-60% throughout the match, I think Souths were something like 85% first half and 93% second half. Without us matching that, it was always going to be a huge struggle. On the topic of Lomax, I think while there are times where his positioning isn't great, it's being made to look worse than it is at the minute as generally we're only dropping back the open side winger and the fullback for most kicks, rather than both wingers. This means Lomax has to be more in a corner, which obviously allows us to cover the threat of running the ball a bit easier, but means there's a hell of a lot more space for them to kick into. For example, for their fourth try, Lomax covers so that Makinson doesn't have to drop back, so that Souths don't have an overlap on the blind side. However as a result, Swift probably needs to push over a bit more to cover for this. Between the two of them they don't communicate enough to cover the big gap, and Souths exploit this, yet how many other teams would have done so? For Souths' first try of the game, Lomax is caught out of position and pretty much in the defensive line. However, this is because Souths got a quick PTB from Inglis, so Masoe is caught on the wrong side of the play the ball - If Lomax wasn't there, there's 4 Souths players on the blind side and 3 attackers (Makinson is out of shot). Reynolds is smart enough to spot this and take advantage, but the previous tackles in the set Lomax was 15m behind the defensive line. The only reason he moved out of position was to cover for other players. On a positive note, our defense in the middle was reasonable solid. We got exposed on the edges - our wingers were okay but Burns and Wilkin made some wrong decisions and Turner was exposed by some good footwork. Through the middle we didn't really give much, despite the obvious talent in the Souths pack. While not at the speed of Souths' kick chases, our chase wasn't too bad despite some pretty ordinary kicking. I think we massively missed Walsh. Obviously for the kicking he would have provided too (and this was a big factor), but also that bit of game sense and direction that Wilkin lacks as a halfback. There was one occasion in the first half where we kicked on the 3rd, about 30-40m out. If it had stayed in it would have been a decent kick, but it went dead and was a huge let off for Souths, while if we had kept the ball till last, we would have been in a pretty decent position to challenge for a kick. Percival looked dangerous on at least 3 occasions but we didn't seem to notice this, instead we sent a lot of traffic down our left at Walker who's obviously a lot more accomplished than Goodwin and Reddy. I think some of our young blokes stood up pretty well - Greenwood, Thompson and Percival in particular. It's just unfortunate that we played what is probably one of the best club rugby league teams ever last night. Lots of lessons to be learned but the effort was there, and Souths would have done that to anyone in Super League on last night's showing, along with lots of NRL clubs.

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:34 pm  

Well I see over-reactions are well and truely up and running.

It's worth pointing out that the Salary cap was not always this big. It used to be a lot closer. Yet in those days with the likes of Cunningham, Long and Scully we still got schooled by the aussies.

Also as has been pointed out Canterbury Bull dogs shipped a load of points against this side.

Our defense was ok, but on the line, they were far quicker than us. The were far quicker in terms of shifting the numbers. There was a play last night that LMS knocked down and they scored. Before the ball was played 2 South's shifted across. Making a 3 on 3 a five on 3. Knock the ball down was the best option as otherwise it was an overlap. That's not bad individual play, that's poor reading as a defensive outfit. Whoever was matching the numbers did not see them shifting the players across (usually coached by the guy in blue, squatting behind and then giving the plays).

On the other hand when we got an overlap, Inglis was outstanding. A few times he came across so quick that he closed a gap other teams would never have been able to shut.

Very easy to jump off the deep end after a bad loss. But sometimes you just have to say they were better. They were and that does not mean in 12 months time the same result would ensue.

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:07 pm  

Upping the salary cap won't make that much difference really at the moment considering that most of the clubs don't have the money to spend the current cap so increasing it at the moment will only increase the gap.
We need to improve the quality of our juniors and improve the quality of the junior comps (improve one and you will improve the other) to make the transition into SL easier because it's clear that even the elite players in the U19s are way off the required standard at the moment.

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:12 pm  

You've just got to admire the defence of the NRL teams, you were about 6 inches away from having 18 points on the board (if your kicker had his boots on).
In our game (Wigan), the tackle on Burgess when he was over the line was unbelievable, he scores there against any team over here, I can imagine you're on a bit of a downer at the moment but you've got to realise Souths are a level above everything in the NRL and several levels above everyone in SL.
I'm just glad we weren't playing them last night, our front row would have been smashed to pieces !

[Sadfish]

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:32 pm  

just typical Saints, top class one week, turnstyles the next.

Lose this one, win the next....

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:38 pm  

People don't have the first clue what they're talking about.

What was Lomax at fault for tonight ? Not sitting deep on the 3rd tackle for South's very first set of the night attacking our try line ? No full back would be deep at that point. It was exceptionally clever rugby from a truly brilliant scrum half in Reynolds.

He wasn't at fault for any others either but by all means, those who need someone to pick on, carry on.

Crazy when it's Wiganers providing the most sensible posts on here. Some of you Saints 'fans' need to get a grip.

Re: Reality check : Mon Feb 23, 2015 3:52 pm  

There's no disgrace losing to Souths. I wouldn't say comparing NRL to SL is like comparing SL to lower league football. But we're definitely heading in that direction. They have more money, players and resources. And the gap will continue to grow. There's not an awful lot we can do about this.

Last night we got off to a bad start. We needed to get some points on the board to calm our nerves and we almost did when Percival went over.

It's disappointing. But I can't say I ever had us down as favourites in the first place. When the Australian press describe this Souths side as one of the best in modern times you have to take it seriously.

I don't want to pin any blame. The truth is that set of players have performed miracles recently and there's no need to make rash decisions after being beaten by a standard of rugby we will never encounter in SL.