Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:02 am  

St pete wrote: Got link to stats? I noticed Greenwood was missing tackles as well which he was when we was winning at the start of the year. I counted walsh missed at least 8 tackles. I thought robes was exclent last night and was best player on the pitch. Mose looked intersted and took the ball up strong but the rest Imo was totally disgusting and embarrassing! Stats: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/11119 I,m expecting a response and a win against the Giants on Friday, its a poor super league this season with no consistency in performance by players, coaches and officials. When you look at Leeds that was only there 5th win in there last 10 games since we met them previously. Cas, Warrington and Wigan have also had bad patches. I reckon 1 more win we stay in the top 4, 2 wins for 3rd place, 3 wins for 2nd place……...…Leeds should stay top even with a possible loss at Wigan.

St pete wrote: Got link to stats? I noticed Greenwood was missing tackles as well which he was when we was winning at the start of the year. I counted walsh missed at least 8 tackles. I thought robes was exclent last night and was best player on the pitch. Mose looked intersted and took the ball up strong but the rest Imo was totally disgusting and embarrassing! Stats: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/11119 I,m expecting a response and a win against the Giants on Friday, its a poor super league this season with no consistency in performance by players, coaches and officials. When you look at Leeds that was only there 5th win in there last 10 games since we met them previously. Cas, Warrington and Wigan have also had bad patches. I reckon 1 more win we stay in the top 4, 2 wins for 3rd place, 3 wins for 2nd place……...…Leeds should stay top even with a possible loss at Wigan.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:33 am  

Judder Man wrote: Stats: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/11119 I,m expecting a response and a win against the Giants on Friday, its a poor super league this season with no consistency in performance by players, coaches and officials. When you look at Leeds that was only there 5th win in there last 10 games since we met them previously. Cas, Warrington and Wigan have also had bad patches. I reckon 1 more win we stay in the top 4, 2 wins for 3rd place, 3 wins for 2nd place……...…Leeds should stay top even with a possible loss at Wigan. On current form over the past 3 weeks, I can only see us getting the one win. I can't see us beating Warrington or hudds but we should have enough to beat hull KR. The hull KR game is the week before the semi so both teams might rest players carrying knocks.

Judder Man wrote: Stats: http://www.superleague.co.uk/report/11119 I,m expecting a response and a win against the Giants on Friday, its a poor super league this season with no consistency in performance by players, coaches and officials. When you look at Leeds that was only there 5th win in there last 10 games since we met them previously. Cas, Warrington and Wigan have also had bad patches. I reckon 1 more win we stay in the top 4, 2 wins for 3rd place, 3 wins for 2nd place……...…Leeds should stay top even with a possible loss at Wigan. On current form over the past 3 weeks, I can only see us getting the one win. I can't see us beating Warrington or hudds but we should have enough to beat hull KR. The hull KR game is the week before the semi so both teams might rest players carrying knocks.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:37 am  

I've seen us play worse with better players.

You can have a class side, but if they don't want to work then they will lose.

That wasn't even going through the motions though. Were all the players injected with some dropsy virus.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:41 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

I've seen us play worse with better players.

You can have a class side, but if they don't want to work then they will lose.

That wasn't even going through the motions though. Were all the players injected with some dropsy virus.

Really? I can't remember seeing us play that bad as we did in first 10 mins. As KC said it's probably the worst start in super league history.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:48 am  

St pete wrote: Really? I can't remember seeing us play that bad as we did in first 10 mins. As KC said it's probably the worst start in super league history. I was there for this debacle. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 917753.stm

St pete wrote: Really? I can't remember seeing us play that bad as we did in first 10 mins. As KC said it's probably the worst start in super league history. I was there for this debacle. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 917753.stm

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:15 am  

bewareshadows wrote: I was there for this debacle. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 917753.stm I was but last nights dropped balls was unreal.

bewareshadows wrote: I was there for this debacle. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 917753.stm I was but last nights dropped balls was unreal.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:36 am  

St pete wrote:

Really? I can't remember seeing us play that bad as we did in first 10 mins. As KC said it's probably the worst start in super league history.

I believe it took us 19 mins to complete our first set and our completion rate was the clubs lowest ever in that first half.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 11:19 am  

Judder Man wrote:

Embarrassing stats: 46 missed tackles with 40% of them contributed by Wilkin, Walsh and Burns. Add in the factor of the very low completion rate in the first half, atrocious performance of the players.
Previous home game against Leeds: 49 missed tackless with Wilkin, Walmsley and Turner the major contributors. We don,t seem to learn anything about defence when playing Leeds.

Stat Wise Wilkin has now become the worst for missed tackles, penalties and caught up with Burns for errors, is this because he is playing "2 positions" during the game.

It was rather amusing watching Wilkin get his "defence" in early by lambasting the team during the after-match interview.

When is Vea back, we need some energy in the pack before Walmsley gets burnt out.

I think one of the biggest contributing factors is the strength of the competition this season. The lower-placed teams are both stronger and more physical and the top teams have had to work a lot harder to maintain their positions. Over the past six or seven weeks Saints, Leeds & Wigan have all begun to look tired. Our task is further complicated by this damnable injury situation which has meant players such as Roby and Walmsley, Wilkin, LMS etc. have had to work double shifts. It's noticeable that some of our guys seem drained in hot, stuffy conditions, too.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 2:15 pm  

bewareshadows wrote: I was there for this debacle. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 917753.stm Christ, there was some real dross in that Saints line up.

bewareshadows wrote: I was there for this debacle. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 917753.stm Christ, there was some real dross in that Saints line up.

Re: Shocker : Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:12 pm  

Charlie Sheen wrote:

Christ, there was some real dross in that Saints line up.

Compared to last night??

Wellens better than percival
Gardner better than dawson
Albert, better than Swift
Gilmour, better than fleming
Talau, = or better to Turner
Wilkin poorer than Walsh, but its getting closer since the injury.
Hooper = Burns
Fozzard, = Amor
Cunningham = Roby
Mason poorer than Mose
Edmondson better = wilkin (in the second row)
Feaunati poorer than greenwood
Fa'asavalu, better than Jones


J. Roby better than flanaghan
Bibey poorer than walmsley
Hardman poorer than Savellio
Bennett probably not as good as LMS, but he was a good workhorse.


Overall that back line would blow ours apart, even with Hooper and Wilkin as halfbacks.
Cunningham and Roby, would eat the current set up of Roby alone.
The pack is somewhat 50/50 and the subs are not a million miles apart.

Apart from Hardman, feaunati and Bibey, I'd swap most of that team. Actually Hardman would get in ahead of dawson and fleming.