Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 176 to 200 of 255

Thread: 21 man squad v Leeds

  1. #176
    Learning All The Songs Brian Nazareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2022
    Posts
    1,236
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    The loss is more frustrating because 2 out of the next 4 games are ones we could rotate some players. To go into those four games with 2 out of 2 would have eased the pressure. The temptation now will be to go strong against Leigh, risking more burn-out.
    He's not the Messiah, he's a naughty boy.

  2. #177
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    759
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Correct

  3. #178
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    257
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    How can it be anything else, though? With a penalty try you’re making a judgement on how likely it is that one thing would have happened had one other thing not happened - that requires interpretation.
    Well personally, I don't think penalty tries should exist at all. Think they're a stupid concept. Should be a penalty and a yellow for the professional foul (or a red if its particularly egregious/foul play) instead. I can't think of any other sport (except RU which is obviously a very similar subject) that invokes it. In football you don't see them saying "that shot was on target, so we'll award the goal because of the handball". They just give the penalty and whoever committed the foul play gets sent off. Whether that's something as obvious as a handball on the line to stop a certain goal, or being fouled by the last man back with only the keeper to beat.

    If they insist on keeping them, you need to rewrite the rule completely. You can't have a rule that's based on opinion. The whole point of a RULE is that it takes subjectivity out of the equation and is to be enforced whether a certain criteria is met. I'm not sure how you re-write it to take opinion out of the equation, because at the end of the day you can never say with 100% certainty any try would have been scored but for something. What I have a problem with is if a defender fouls, then RL seems to say "would they have scored the try without that defender there" which is daft, because the defender is there. It's why i think they should just scrap it completely. Penalty tries are lame af

    As for re-writing a penalty try rule, you'd just have to set certain parameters to take opinion out of the equation. First thing should be "did the attacker have possession?". I don't think you should ever be able to award a penalty try if the attacker doesn't have possession because there's no telling whatsoever whether or not he'd have managed to collect possession, or ground a loose ball without knocking on. Using last year's semi, you can't say a try would have been scored because it was a loose bouncing ball, and anything can happen with that. If the defender does have possession, then move onto the next bit of criteria. You could make criteria for whether the attacker was within 10m of the try line when the offence occurred (because if not then you cant confidently say if he would have otherwise been caught etc), was there another covering defender within 3-5m of the attacker that could possibly have stopped them even if we take the offending defender out of the equation.

    People smarter than me can go through and re-write it, but there are plenty of possibilities that are miles better than "in the opinion of the referee, a try would have been scored"

  4. #179
    In The West Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    5,572
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poysaint View Post
    Well personally, I don't think penalty tries should exist at all. Think they're a stupid concept. Should be a penalty and a yellow for the professional foul (or a red if its particularly egregious/foul play) instead. I can't think of any other sport (except RU which is obviously a very similar subject) that invokes it. In football you don't see them saying "that shot was on target, so we'll award the goal because of the handball". They just give the penalty and whoever committed the foul play gets sent off. Whether that's something as obvious as a handball on the line to stop a certain goal, or being fouled by the last man back with only the keeper to beat.

    If they insist on keeping them, you need to rewrite the rule completely. You can't have a rule that's based on opinion. The whole point of a RULE is that it takes subjectivity out of the equation and is to be enforced whether a certain criteria is met. I'm not sure how you re-write it to take opinion out of the equation, because at the end of the day you can never say with 100% certainty any try would have been scored but for something. What I have a problem with is if a defender fouls, then RL seems to say "would they have scored the try without that defender there" which is daft, because the defender is there. It's why i think they should just scrap it completely. Penalty tries are lame af

    As for re-writing a penalty try rule, you'd just have to set certain parameters to take opinion out of the equation. First thing should be "did the attacker have possession?". I don't think you should ever be able to award a penalty try if the attacker doesn't have possession because there's no telling whatsoever whether or not he'd have managed to collect possession, or ground a loose ball without knocking on. Using last year's semi, you can't say a try would have been scored because it was a loose bouncing ball, and anything can happen with that. If the defender does have possession, then move onto the next bit of criteria. You could make criteria for whether the attacker was within 10m of the try line when the offence occurred (because if not then you cant confidently say if he would have otherwise been caught etc), was there another covering defender within 3-5m of the attacker that could possibly have stopped them even if we take the offending defender out of the equation.

    People smarter than me can go through and re-write it, but there are plenty of possibilities that are miles better than "in the opinion of the referee, a try would have been scored"
    Yeah, I think I pretty much agree with you on the first two paragraphs; it's a flimsy concept and a card punishment for the offender would make more sense.

    Even being in possession is less than a perfect measure. Look at the Faraimo no-try last weekend. If you'd have paused that when he was a yard short of the try line pretty much anyone would say the try was a certainty, which was ultimately proved to be false.

  5. #180
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,340
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    If we are not going to play Royle as a sub then put Pemberton in and give him minutes.

  6. #181
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Bury
    Posts
    1,847
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Moore View Post
    Should be better prepared for Leigh with the 7 day turnaround, but with the uncertainty of the Disciplinary we could be missing a few more.
    but they are having 3 days off aren't they? Won't be surprised if we have 3 banned for Friday

  7. #182
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,872
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saint from Bury View Post
    but they are having 3 days off aren't they? Won't be surprised if we have 3 banned for Friday
    Probably Hurrell and Matautia, the Sironen incident looked quite soft for me. The Walters one will be very interesting for Wello if thats OK and not a shoulder charge then Wello Quote: "Will coach his players to tackle like that".

  8. #183
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sthelens
    Posts
    668
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    Probably Hurrell and Matautia, the Sironen incident looked quite soft for me. The Walters one will be very interesting for Wello if thats OK and not a shoulder charge then Wello Quote: "Will coach his players to tackle like that".
    Richard Silverwood has already said it was penalty

  9. #184
    Learning All The Songs The Chief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Newton-le-Willows
    Age
    50
    Posts
    1,921
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    What wound me up more than anything was seeing the smirk on Walters face after the final whistle. The guy knew he’d got away with one and should have been cooling his heels on the bench in the last 10 watching his team lose rather than celebrating a extremely fortunate win against the run of play. Leeds stuck in there and took their chances but should never have been in any position to get anywhere near winning the game, we can blame Kendall’s inept refereeing, unconscious bias or whatever, but Sione and Siro both play on or close to the edge, they need to figure out a way to apply pressure to a half without late hits, simple. Hurrells challenge was indefensible too, late and shoulder contact to the head, but at least we have the class to admit it. For Smith to be interviewed after the game saying Walters arm wasn’t by his side totally undermines his credibility. Wello was far more gracious in defeat. Smith should have just said he didn’t see it properly and would check out the replay afterwards, not go into full on defence mode of his players, who were also quite obviously goading saints fans into a reaction after the whilstle. The woman who was tearing strips off Smith near the sky camera didn’t do herself any favours but emotions are clearly running high after a ludicrous ending to a game like that.

    I agree though, much more for us to learn from that performance than Leeds.

  10. #185
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Location
    In the kitchen, trying to remember why I came here.
    Posts
    374
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    Watched the match again last night, Kendall not as bad as first thought just the "shoulder Charge" as the most controversial one. The main thing was Myler more or less faking injury on every tackle. he was very clever with Hurrell he watched him coning into tackle and released the ball then moved his head towards the tackle knowing he could get a penalty. Also thought Welsby was unlucky as Walters looked as though he was going to head butt Welsby twice, the officials should have picked that up.

    On our performance you could see our line speed was slower than the normal and the defensive line was like a dogs back leg, this was allowing the ball going out wide and the off loads, lots of ball watching by saints and gave Sezer and Austin too much space. Austin off side quite a few times which Kendall didn't pick up. Sironen was a soft yellow but Matautia could get a game ban alongside Hurrell.
    Likewise. Had he not mishandled 'the shoulder charge' TM would probably have kicked the penalty, we'd have probably won 26-24, Koni probably wouldn't have been sent off and we'd have all gone home happy that a weary Saints had scraped a win against an 'up for it' Leeds without much thought for the referee. It does, however, highlight the impact poor reffing can have, though. Not only did that one decision potentially cost us the game it led to us probably losing a player for a few weeks, created an ugly situation that may well spill over into the next time we play them and has now created a wider uncertainty about what exactly is a shoulder charge.

    A number have said that the Saints players should have handled it better. No doubt we'd prefer that they had (they may have if Robes had been on) and Wello will certainly be trying to coach them to next time, but they are only human and I don't think that should be allowed to divert attention from the real cause of that last mad 10 minutes, which could have wider repercussions.

    A couple of other general thoughts:

    1. I have heard it said he penalised Welsby because he had already given the captains a warning about running in. As I recall that only happened once previously in the game, when the Leeds players ran in following (I think) an LMS high tackle. Which effectively means we were punished because Leeds had run in previously.

    2. Very harsh to disallow TM's 'try', I think. I was under the impression that the VR can only overturn the on-field call if there is clear evidence of an error. Don't see how the evidence can be 'clear' if you have to view the incident in super slo-mo numerous times.

    3. I don't think Percy's try was any more an 8 pointer than either of the ones the night before (though I accept others have a different view of the Dupree incident in particular). But if they were, surely it was. Now we have two completely different interpretations of the rules on two consecutive nights. Another self-inflicted mess for the RFL to sort out.

  11. #186
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,522
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DewiSant View Post
    Likewise. Had he not mishandled 'the shoulder charge' TM would probably have kicked the penalty, we'd have probably won 26-24, Koni probably wouldn't have been sent off and we'd have all gone home happy that a weary Saints had scraped a win against an 'up for it' Leeds without much thought for the referee. It does, however, highlight the impact poor reffing can have, though. Not only did that one decision potentially cost us the game it led to us probably losing a player for a few weeks, created an ugly situation that may well spill over into the next time we play them and has now created a wider uncertainty about what exactly is a shoulder charge.

    A number have said that the Saints players should have handled it better. No doubt we'd prefer that they had (they may have if Robes had been on) and Wello will certainly be trying to coach them to next time, but they are only human and I don't think that should be allowed to divert attention from the real cause of that last mad 10 minutes, which could have wider repercussions.

    A couple of other general thoughts:

    1. I have heard it said he penalised Welsby because he had already given the captains a warning about running in. As I recall that only happened once previously in the game, when the Leeds players ran in following (I think) an LMS high tackle. Which effectively means we were punished because Leeds had run in previously.

    2. Very harsh to disallow TM's 'try', I think. I was under the impression that the VR can only overturn the on-field call if there is clear evidence of an error. Don't see how the evidence can be 'clear' if you have to view the incident in super slo-mo numerous times.

    3. I don't think Percy's try was any more an 8 pointer than either of the ones the night before (though I accept others have a different view of the Dupree incident in particular). But if they were, surely it was. Now we have two completely different interpretations of the rules on two consecutive nights. Another self-inflicted mess for the RFL to sort out.
    It was clear it was a no try after 1 look,no idea why he went to so many different views

  12. #187
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Location
    In the kitchen, trying to remember why I came here.
    Posts
    374
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Perhaps because it wasn't quite so clear to him?

  13. #188
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,522
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DewiSant View Post
    Perhaps because it wasn't quite so clear to him?
    No it's down to the whole try no try rubbish. All they need to do is " is it a try ? ". Everyone i was watching the game with saw on the first view it was no try,it didn't need another 12 views.

  14. #189
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Wirral
    Posts
    2,662
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Chief View Post
    What wound me up more than anything was seeing the smirk on Walters face after the final whistle. The guy knew he’d got away with one and should have been cooling his heels on the bench in the last 10 watching his team lose rather than celebrating a extremely fortunate win against the run of play. Leeds stuck in there and took their chances but should never have been in any position to get anywhere near winning the game, we can blame Kendall’s inept refereeing, unconscious bias or whatever, but Sione and Siro both play on or close to the edge, they need to figure out a way to apply pressure to a half without late hits, simple. Hurrells challenge was indefensible too, late and shoulder contact to the head, but at least we have the class to admit it. For Smith to be interviewed after the game saying Walters arm wasn’t by his side totally undermines his credibility. Wello was far more gracious in defeat. Smith should have just said he didn’t see it properly and would check out the replay afterwards, not go into full on defence mode of his players, who were also quite obviously goading saints fans into a reaction after the whilstle. The woman who was tearing strips off Smith near the sky camera didn’t do herself any favours but emotions are clearly running high after a ludicrous ending to a game like that.

    I agree though, much more for us to learn from that performance than Leeds.


    I think, as usual, that the problem is consistency. I accept that referees as human beings can make mistakes but with the aid of touch judges and more importantly the video referee, these errors should be down to acceptable levels. The atmosphere at the end of the game was febrile and it didn't come across at all on SKY when I got home and watched on TV. Every 50/50 went against Saints, which only stoked the sense of injustice on the terraces. The "eight point try" (which I agree with other posters should be got rid of), was in the context of the game played the day before, a stone wall eight point try, so why when Lomax queried as much did Kendal just laugh at him? More to the point the individual actually weighing up the evidence refused the option, although he was the referee who had sent the two up as penalty tries when he was officiating the day before? Sironen got ten minutes in the bin because he was fractionally late and as usual, Richie Myler (a vile man at the best of times, ask his wife!) play acted like a Premier League footballer, and after getting our player sin binned, bounced up and was running around like a spring lamb! Finally the biggest error(?) by Kendall was the shoulder charge which was not awarded in the closing moments. Again, all we want is consistency. I can accept that he missed the original offence, I did! Except I was sitting in a stand at the other side of the pitch! There was no excuse for Kendall, not as the incident was played time and time again on the big screen. The fact the offender was removed from the field in the ensuing confusion tells anyone with half a brain he was guilty. Kendall compounded his inadequacy by telling our team that "I'm in charge not Jack Welsby", this in a game when Blake Austin had been in his ear all night! The penalty was given in a fit of petulance rather than enforcing the rules as they should have been. In short because of lack of consistency and too much ego, Leeds won the game. Don't get me wrong, Saints weren't great, not surprising after what we've been through the last few weeks, but we could well have won the game but for the appalling decsions by the referee. I just keep thinking back to the "Covid Grand Final" where with two minutes to go Kendall gave Wigan that match winning chance of a penalty (which wasn't) only to see us race up the other end after Wigan's miss and win the game. Mr Kendall, take a look at yourself.

  15. #190
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Location
    In the kitchen, trying to remember why I came here.
    Posts
    374
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brook View Post
    No it's down to the whole try no try rubbish. All they need to do is " is it a try ? ". Everyone i was watching the game with saw on the first view it was no try, it didn't need another 12 views.
    Exactly. But if he did need them how, in the rules as they now are, could he then overrule the on-field call?

  16. #191
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,527
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Prez View Post
    I think, as usual, that the problem is consistency. I accept that referees as human beings can make mistakes but with the aid of touch judges and more importantly the video referee, these errors should be down to acceptable levels. The atmosphere at the end of the game was febrile and it didn't come across at all on SKY when I got home and watched on TV. Every 50/50 went against Saints, which only stoked the sense of injustice on the terraces. The "eight point try" (which I agree with other posters should be got rid of), was in the context of the game played the day before, a stone wall eight point try, so why when Lomax queried as much did Kendal just laugh at him? More to the point the individual actually weighing up the evidence refused the option, although he was the referee who had sent the two up as penalty tries when he was officiating the day before? Sironen got ten minutes in the bin because he was fractionally late and as usual, Richie Myler (a vile man at the best of times, ask his wife!) play acted like a Premier League footballer, and after getting our player sin binned, bounced up and was running around like a spring lamb! Finally the biggest error(?) by Kendall was the shoulder charge which was not awarded in the closing moments. Again, all we want is consistency. I can accept that he missed the original offence, I did! Except I was sitting in a stand at the other side of the pitch! There was no excuse for Kendall, not as the incident was played time and time again on the big screen. The fact the offender was removed from the field in the ensuing confusion tells anyone with half a brain he was guilty. Kendall compounded his inadequacy by telling our team that "I'm in charge not Jack Welsby", this in a game when Blake Austin had been in his ear all night! The penalty was given in a fit of petulance rather than enforcing the rules as they should have been. In short because of lack of consistency and too much ego, Leeds won the game. Don't get me wrong, Saints weren't great, not surprising after what we've been through the last few weeks, but we could well have won the game but for the appalling decsions by the referee. I just keep thinking back to the "Covid Grand Final" where with two minutes to go Kendall gave Wigan that match winning chance of a penalty (which wasn't) only to see us race up the other end after Wigan's miss and win the game. Mr Kendall, take a look at yourself.
    Don’t disagree with any of that BUT. If Welsby keeps his cool we continue that set and get a shot at a drop goal, hopefully this is a very valuable lesson learned

  17. #192
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,178
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DewiSant View Post
    Exactly. But if he did need them how, in the rules as they now are, could he then overrule the on-field call?
    I thought it was no try but there have been many decisions were the ref has been more blatantly wrong, and they have been confirmed because they have said there wasn’t clear evidence the ref was wrong.

  18. #193
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    1,179
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    I think it was clear to everyone it wasn't a mistake

    It was the ref showing his dominance and not allowing welsby to run in to get the penalty

    I don't want to say Lees should have stayed down because that shit needs cutting out but the video ref needs to be able to pick these things up so the players don't have to highlight it
    Last edited by CGSaint; 5th March 2023 at 21:51.
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS
    Insta @christianjamescreative

  19. #194
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    1,179
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    And remember sky Commentators were apologising after they seen the reply as in to say he had a right to run in

    Whole thing was a farce. Just be interesting to see who gets away with that sort of impact now
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS
    Insta @christianjamescreative

  20. #195
    Noooobie
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    28
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Hi all. Fairly new to Redvee so thought I'd share my thoughts.
    Having watched the game back after being there on Friday, I thought Kendall didn't perform as bad as watching it live. Some questionable decisions (potential penalty try, 50:50 decisions, Sam Walters shoulder charge, etc) but thought he did OK. After watching it back even though he only stood his ground, the Konnie red card was correct. We had chances to put ourselves in front with Tommy missing under the sticks and still don't know why we didn't go for the DG at 24-18.
    My only real gripe is the bench. LMS, Wingfield, Bell, Royle is not a good bench. If we are not going to even play Royle, then that just shows how far down the pecking order Norman has fallen. We have Walmsley and Lees starting with Louie and Paasi on the bench. If only 1 of those get injured we are knackered. Norman is not good enough considering his size and we have no one else. (Apart from Delaney who I've heard only good things about but might not be ready just yet). We are desperate for another Prop IMO.

  21. #196
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    257
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    Yeah, I think I pretty much agree with you on the first two paragraphs; it's a flimsy concept and a card punishment for the offender would make more sense.

    Even being in possession is less than a perfect measure. Look at the Faraimo no-try last weekend. If you'd have paused that when he was a yard short of the try line pretty much anyone would say the try was a certainty, which was ultimately proved to be false.
    Yep, that's why the rule is stupid because you can never ever say that a try was certain to be scored

  22. #197
    Learning All The Songs bewareshadows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    1,921
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    At the end of the game I was fuming due to the decisions of the ref. However, given time to calm down I see the game as a real positive. Why you may ask?

    Well you get games where the ref is against you (clearly the missed shoulder charge was a case of feck the actual rules I'm going to put Welsby in his place. Ref even name dropped him in his decision)

    You also get games in a season were you are not at 100%.

    You also get games were the team will go down to 12 due to indissipline.

    For Leeds they were in 11th and potentially looking at finishing the weekend bottom clearly much more was on the line for them. They probably played as well as they could.

    Factor all that but then remember we only lost by 1 point at the last minute. You will struggle to get all those factors in one single game again for another 500 games.

    So that is why I see it as a positive, as poor as saints and the ref were and as positive as leeds were, they could only really score when we were down to 12.

    Its all very fixable and fix just one of those things and saints run out comfortable winners. Dissipline and energy are all within saints control to fix.

    Get them sorted and even off the back of an average performance leeds only score once and we are 4 or 5 tries to the good.

    Also it never hurts to get brought back to earth to realise sport is not played on paper.

  23. #198
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,225
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bewareshadows View Post
    At the end of the game I was fuming due to the decisions of the ref. However, given time to calm down I see the game as a real positive. Why you may ask?

    Well you get games where the ref is against you (clearly the missed shoulder charge was a case of feck the actual rules I'm going to put Welsby in his place. Ref even name dropped him in his decision)

    You also get games in a season were you are not at 100%.

    You also get games were the team will go down to 12 due to indissipline.

    For Leeds they were in 11th and potentially looking at finishing the weekend bottom clearly much more was on the line for them. They probably played as well as they could.

    Factor all that but then remember we only lost by 1 point at the last minute. You will struggle to get all those factors in one single game again for another 500 games.

    So that is why I see it as a positive, as poor as saints and the ref were and as positive as leeds were, they could only really score when we were down to 12.

    Its all very fixable and fix just one of those things and saints run out comfortable winners. Dissipline and energy are all within saints control to fix.

    Get them sorted and even off the back of an average performance leeds only score once and we are 4 or 5 tries to the good.

    Also it never hurts to get brought back to earth to realise sport is not played on paper.
    Agree with this - we can harp about the ref all we want but we had three players carded, missed a soft kick at goal and reacted badly in some situations and it cost us.

    There is PLENTY for us to go on before we get to the ref, as much as the Walters decision was a poor one.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  24. #199
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,872
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bewareshadows View Post
    At the end of the game I was fuming due to the decisions of the ref. However, given time to calm down I see the game as a real positive. Why you may ask?

    Well you get games where the ref is against you (clearly the missed shoulder charge was a case of feck the actual rules I'm going to put Welsby in his place. Ref even name dropped him in his decision)

    You also get games in a season were you are not at 100%.

    You also get games were the team will go down to 12 due to indissipline.

    For Leeds they were in 11th and potentially looking at finishing the weekend bottom clearly much more was on the line for them. They probably played as well as they could.

    Factor all that but then remember we only lost by 1 point at the last minute. You will struggle to get all those factors in one single game again for another 500 games.

    So that is why I see it as a positive, as poor as saints and the ref were and as positive as leeds were, they could only really score when we were down to 12.

    Its all very fixable and fix just one of those things and saints run out comfortable winners. Dissipline and energy are all within saints control to fix.

    Get them sorted and even off the back of an average performance leeds only score once and we are 4 or 5 tries to the good.

    Also it never hurts to get brought back to earth to realise sport is not played on paper.
    Yes that was a similar perspective I came up with. Basically Leeds playing the best they could and Saints defensively played well below par with a lack of energy and composure. I,ve not dwelled on Kendall too much it was only the shoulder charge that was a significant turning point the rest of the stuff was our undoing.

    After the WCC game and that 50+ hours journey back home I was expecting us to be struggling for 3 or 4 weeks, now with injuries and suspensions hanging over us that is very much a reality. For the opposition its a very good time to play the saints at the moment but as we approach the Easter period I expect us to be back at our champions standard.

  25. #200
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    257
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    I thought it was no try but there have been many decisions were the ref has been more blatantly wrong, and they have been confirmed because they have said there wasn’t clear evidence the ref was wrong.
    I thought it was a try, but I'm not 100% sure of the rules regarding grounding. The VR was saying it touched his hand so he had to regain possession or something? Don't think I've heard that before. He looked to have way more downward pressure/control than half of the "fingertip" groundings we see every week

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •