21 Jul: SL: London Broncos v St Helens KO 3pm

[Dunbar]

2 minutes ago, Denton Rovers RLFC said:

In exactly the same way your hypothetical scenario as to outcome if saints had played with the strongest team YOU think they should have had out right?

So your counter argument to something that has actually happened is imagining what might have happened as a result of something else happening?

You do realise that something that has actually happened is not hypothetical?

[Jim Prendle]

2 minutes ago, Denton Rovers RLFC said:

Utterly irrelevant

Just like most of the stuff you have written in this thread.

And please don't lecture me about not understanding "the nature of the sport" because I have no idea what you are talking about.

Saints reserves would beat Halifax next week, so they had no need to disrespect the likes of Leeds and Hull KR like they have today.

[Denton Rovers RLFC]

Just now, Jim Prendle said:

Saints had no need whatsoever to rest that many players today.

It shows a huge amount of disrespect to the other teams fighting relegation when, with respect to Halifax, they could win at a canter next week with the team they selected today.

I've seen this happen before, but this is one of the more pointless ones in my opinion.

Why didn't they, do you know how fatigued the players were or what niggles they might have had? Do you not care about player welfare much like the rest of SL?RFL fans and coaches alike? How can you know that fatigued players will perform better than those that aren't and/or are carrying knocks?

I've seen my own team not rest players only a few weeks back and get beaten by a relegation threatened side and then get absolutely drummed the next week by Saints going through the motions for 40 minutes, why do you think that was. Might it have been down to fatigue and/or carrying knocks and a coach out of his depth not understanding what has happened previously when he did rest a bunch of players and defeated a team who didn't that were higher in the league and bang on form.

It shows ultimate respect to the players first and foremost in one of the most brutal sports on the planet that get a pittance compared to many tens of thousands doing far less extraneous effort for far more money.

What yours and others comments show is massive DISRESPECT to a London side that have shown they are battlers, can beat a side with far fewer 'names' in their side and with a very skinny squad. You moaners are the problem here not Saints/Holbrook!

[gingerjon]

I am very much enjoying making a mockery of the competition.

I haven't read the thread but I assume that's the gist.

[Jim Prendle]

2 minutes ago, Denton Rovers RLFC said:

Why didn't they, do you know how fatigued the players were or what niggles they might have had? Do you not care about player welfare much like the rest of SL?RFL fans and coaches alike? How can you know that fatigued players will perform better than those that aren't and/or are carrying knocks?

I've seen my own team not rest players only a few weeks back and get beaten by a relegation threatened side and then get absolutely drummed the next week by Saints going through the motions for 40 minutes, why do you think that was. Might it have been down to fatigue and/or carrying knocks and a coach out of his depth not understanding what has happened previously when he did rest a bunch of players and defeated a team who didn't that were higher in the league and bang on form.

It shows ultimate respect to the players first and foremost in one of the most brutal sports on the planet that get a pittance compared to many tens of thousands doing far less extraneous effort for far more money.

What yours and others comments show is massive DISRESPECT to a London side that have shown they are battlers, can beat a side with far fewer 'names' in their side and with a very skinny squad. You moaners are the problem here not Saints/Holbrook!

Stop embarrassing yourself.

[Denton Rovers RLFC]

5 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

So your counter argument to something that has actually happened is imagining what might have happened as a result of something else happening?

You do realise that something that has actually happened is not hypothetical?

The argument was proposed that IF Saints had played more players from their first XVII the outcome would be different and by doing so the team (other than London) that gets relegated -which would be utterly moot if it is London, would be upset/annoyed that Saints had not played the theoretical strongest team.

Clearly theorising on what occurs on any given match and who is picked is the sole argument here, even the extent of theorising that whichever team is relegated would also be annoyed at that one game where a team played another team and the team at the top of the table lost to a near rival for the relegation spot. it's laughable that you can't see how out of whack that sad little argument is. I'll leave it there as it's obviously too much for you to grasp as to the futility and weakness in the argument proposed. 

[Moscow01]

Ask yourself which game St Helens would rather win - A meaningless league game or a Challenge Cup semi-final? 

 

Saints have earned the right to rest whoever they like, for what they see as a much bigger game in the Challenge Cup. 

 

It’s as simple as that. 

[nadera78]

I'd have done the same as Holbrook, given the situation - his job is to win trophies and this game had no bearing on that whereas next weeks fixture does. And I wouldn't have given the other teams in the competition a second thought.

Anyway, it was a lovely day in the sun. Walker, as said elsewhere, had his best game for ages, and the same goes for Abdull who's been a little off the pace recently but was full on today. A hard working team putting in a lot of effort and coming away with a deserved victory - that's what I'll take away from today.

[Jim Prendle]

5 minutes ago, Moscow01 said:

Saints have earned the right to rest whoever they like.. 

Have they?

I thought the idea was that you have to play the strongest team available in each and every fixture to ensure a level playing field for all competitors?

Saints haven't earned any right to go against that, no matter how many points in front they might be.

[Dunbar]

13 minutes ago, Denton Rovers RLFC said:

The argument was proposed that IF Saints had played more players from their first XVII the outcome would be different and by doing so the team (other than London) that gets relegated -which would be utterly moot if it is London, would be upset/annoyed that Saints had not played the theoretical strongest team.

Clearly theorising on what occurs on any given match and who is picked is the sole argument here, even the extent of theorising that whichever team is relegated would also be annoyed at that one game where a team played another team and the team at the top of the table lost to a near rival for the relegation spot. it's laughable that you can't see how out of whack that sad little argument is. I'll leave it there as it's obviously too much for you to grasp as to the futility and weakness in the argument proposed. 

If Saints had played their full team they may have won and they may have lost. That is a hypothetical. 

What they actually did was play a weakened team and lost. That is a fact. 

I'm not theorising... I am saying that teams fighting London to avoid relegation have a right to feel a little aggrieved at the Saints selection today. 

I don't mind if you don't think Saints did anything wrong and I dont mind if you want to argue that the season is full of variables but trying to argue away what happened today with a whole bunch of 'what if's' is illogical. 

[daz39]

Huddersfield had loads of youngsters on Friday but for some reason Hull Kr and Leeds fans aren't batting an eyelid at that ??

[nadera78]

1 hour ago, Saintslass said:

LMS binned for dissent?  Never!  Actually, he's been a good boy for the last couple of years.  This sounds like retro LMS.  Must be returning to Laaandan wot's done it!

 

He was actually Sts best player today - he was desperate to win that match! Probably why he got a little bit mouthy towards the ref. I do like him though, he so obviously loves playing the game, you can see it every time he plays.

[Jim Prendle]

Just now, daz39 said:

Huddersfield had loads of youngsters on Friday but for some reason Hull Kr and Leeds fans aren't batting an eyelid at that ??

Was that down to Huddersfield having a lot of injuries though? That sort of situation simply cannot be avoided, and is very different to what Saints did today.

[Oliver Clothesoff]

Won £248.50. Up the Saints Resting Everyone. 

[Jim Prendle]

Just now, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Won £248.50. Up the Saints Resting Everyone. 

You must be so proud.

 

[Curly perm]

I hope Saints play this team against Wakey in a couple of weeks time...we’ll still lose, it just might keep the score down!

[Davo5]

3 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

Was that down to Huddersfield having a lot of injuries though? That sort of situation simply cannot be avoided, and is very different to what Saints did today.

Do you know how many of the Saints players were injured/carrying injuries and how many were just rested

[Chronicler of Chiswick]

Er, like WOW man! Don't think that all the wittering about Saints fielding a weakened side is at all relevant - the 'second' string players would be (hopefully not literally!) busting a gut to show Holbrook that they're good enough to be first team regulars.

[Magic XIII]

Saints were somewhat disjointed, especially with Paulo at stand off. But they did a reasonable job. Broncos had slightly too much for them. It was an odd game. As for the referee being a Bronco, laughable, he had red vee all over him. LMS was immense, wish he was still with us. 

[Oliver Clothesoff]

7 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

You must be so proud.

 

Amongst other feelings, yeah. 

[Moove]

36 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

I’m not sure what Saints were trying to gain by resting so many players - they surely must have realised London at home are a difficult proposition. It was a bit insulting to London, not that they care, it will have made Danny Ward’s team talk easy. 

If Saints were playing a top team next week I could understand but they’re playing a mid table Championship team. 

It’s totally Holbrook’s who he picks but I’m just not sure what he was trying to achieve, other than a London win

As Holbrook has said, if you're a team aiming to play in both finals then you don't get any weeks off all through the season now there's no international break. If he thinks this is the best way to freshen the players up for the big games to come then that's his perogative.

The nonsense from other posters about it being disrespectful to London is way off. This is nothing to do with London and everything to do with there being a semi final to play next week. If anything it's showing respect to Halifax that Saints have prepared for their semi the same way any club would in the same position.

Every single one of the players in the team today are from the 30 man squad registered at the start of the season. We (and any other club for that matter) are perfectly within our rights to use any of them however we see fit. If that has benefited London on this occasion then fine, maybe Wakey, Leeds et al should have tried to be better through the season and then they wouldn't be in trouble anyway. Who knows they could have even then be in a position to rest players themselves.

[daz39]

11 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

Was that down to Huddersfield having a lot of injuries though? That sort of situation simply cannot be avoided, and is very different to what Saints did today.

Not really, we have some injuries but the kids are playing well so are keeping more senior players out. We could have put out a stronger squad but again that's our choice to play who we wanted.

[Dunbar]

2 minutes ago, Chronicler of Chiswick said:

Er, like WOW man! Don't think that all the wittering about Saints fielding a weakened side is at all relevant - the 'second' string players would be (hopefully not literally!) busting a gut to show Holbrook that they're good enough to be first team regulars.

I think the key point is that they are not as good as the players rested.

For the life of me I can't understand how a team at the top of the league resting their best players and losing to the team at the bottom can be described as anything other than relevant. 

[Oliver Clothesoff]

Just now, Magic XIII said:

Saints were somewhat disjointed, especially with Paulo at stand off. But they did a reasonable job. Broncos had slightly too much for them. It was an odd game. As for the referee being a Bronco, laughable, he had red vee all over him. LMS was immense, wish he was still with us. 

Strange comment about the referee. I didn’t get that impression nor did I think he was particularly weighted to London. He appeared inexperienced but not necessarily biased towards anyone. 

LMS is a clown. He can do good stuff but let’s him down with idiocy like getting sin binned. 

[Moove]

17 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

Have they?

I thought the idea was that you have to play the strongest team available in each and every fixture to ensure a level playing field for all competitors?

Saints haven't earned any right to go against that, no matter how many points in front they might be.

So no team can ever rest any player who isn't injured, EVER? That's utterly ridiculous. Clubs register a squad of players at the start of the season, not a list of 17 that they're not allowed to deviate from.