: Sat Jul 11, 2009 11:19 am  

tvoc wrote:

Tomorrow is their acid test, let's see how they handle that first.

It should be a must win game for them at home.

With Cunningham and Long out, I think they might just fancy their chances. I did hear on Thursday from a Stains fan that he thinks Long has played his last game for them and that Potter will use this to find his replacement ready for next season.

: Sat Jul 11, 2009 12:49 pm  

I hope they beat saints because they always play well against them and end up losing by a try or drop goal!

: Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:21 pm  

On the basis of tonight's game which I thought was a cracker, it's a good job the playoffs aren't for another good few weeks.
Despite being without Long, Cunningham, Cayless and Gidley, Saints were still good enough to beat the Wolves away.
Credit where it's due, as Phil Clarke said on the commentary they've done this by blooding 5 youngsters who've come through their academy, something we did 6 or so years ago & look where we are now. That is my concern about the current (my perception) lack of real quality in the Reserves & Academy sides currently - particularaly in the forwards.

: Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:30 pm  

Old Feller wrote:

On the basis of tonight's game which I thought was a cracker, it's a good job the playoffs aren't for another good few weeks.
Despite being without Long, Cunningham, Cayless and Gidley, Saints were still good enough to beat the Wolves away.
Credit where it's due, as Phil Clarke said on the commentary they've done this by blooding 5 youngsters who've come through their academy, something we did 6 or so years ago & look where we are now. That is my concern about the current (my perception) lack of real quality in the Reserves & Academy sides currently - particularaly in the forwards.

dont think so mate , ive seen quite a few un18 games this season and it aint the forewards that are letting anybody down , go see for yourself and dont just go of a score line in the paper , go and watch the lack ov quality in the forewards as you would put it , then after youve seen them you can come back and write down what you saw !

: Sat Jul 11, 2009 11:32 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Tomorrow is their acid test, let's see how they handle that first.

It should be a must win game for them at home.

Acid test failed but thought it was a good game to watch.

A pity Morley was unavailable but St Helens were hit harder than Warrington and still looked a class apart.

I thought Silverwood had a good game overall and Ganson likewise on the buttons.

: Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:01 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Acid test failed but thought it was a good game to watch.

A pity Morley was unavailable but St Helens were hit harder than Warrington and still looked a class apart.

I thought Silverwood had a good game overall and Ganson likewise on the buttons.

Agreed apart from the failure to spot the tackle/assault on Grix and why on earth does Cummings persist in picking Ganson to be involved as an official when Saints are playing?
I cannot believe that there was no other qualified official available to fulfil that role.

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:23 am  

tvoc wrote:

Acid test failed but thought it was a good game to watch.

A pity Morley was unavailable but St Helens were hit harder than Warrington and still looked a class apart.

I thought Silverwood had a good game overall and Ganson likewise on the buttons.

Were they really hit harder than Warrington?

I thought Saints were very impresive, especially second half, but they were missing Gidley and Long. As Phil Clarke alluded to, do Saints look a better team with Eastmond instead of Long, Personally I think they do.

Wire were missing Morley, Rahuiha (spelling), Higham, Briers, Hicks, and probably others.

IMO had wire had Morely and Higham in that game, the result might have been different.

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:29 am  

Gotcha wrote:

Were they really hit harder than Warrington?

I thought Saints were very impresive, especially second half, but they were missing Gidley and Long. As Phil Clarke alluded to, do Saints look a better team with Eastmond instead of Long, Personally I think they do.

Wire were missing Morley, Rahuiha (spelling), Higham, Briers, Hicks, and probably others.

IMO had wire had Morely and Higham in that game, the result might have been different.

It's hard to be 100% sure on that one imo.
In the past saints have gone there with patched up sides and still won oh plus they were also missing cunningham and cayless.
Either way warrington showed that they can be competitive as they do every season and i still put them in the same group as the giants and HKR although the other 2 have managed to beat saints

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:36 am  

rhinoms wrote:

It's hard to be 100% sure on that one imo.
In the past saints have gone there with patched up sides and still won oh plus they were also missing cunningham and cayless.
Either way warrington showed that they can be competitive as they do every season and i still put them in the same group as the giants and HKR although the other 2 have managed to beat saints

Not saying its 100%, just an opinion. Forgot about Cunningam so thats fair enough, but Cayless never plays anyway and seems a waste of time.

Still think Wire were harder hit than Saints in the injuries department, and a smaller squad to choose from. And that Morley makes such a huge difference to that side.

: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:39 am  

Gotcha wrote:

Not saying its 100%, just an opinion. Forgot about Cunningam so thats fair enough, but Cayless never plays anyway and seems a waste of time.

Still think Wire were harder hit than Saints in the injuries department, and a smaller squad to choose from. And that Morley makes such a huge difference to that side.

I agree re-morley he does offer so much to them but great teams adapt to their situations within matchs and thats 1 of the places i think wire are short at the moment.