Fri 3rd Mar: SL: St Helens v Leeds Rhinos KO 20:00 (Sky)

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Totally agree

Saints fans and the club (Wellens)are doing a good job of trying to confuse that particular issue

To be fair, so did the pundits. They were positioning it as Leeds player no penalty vs Saints player red card. They were not even close to being the same offence. 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

To be fair, so did the pundits. They were positioning it as Leeds player no penalty vs Saints player red card. They were not even close to being the same offence. 

Miraculously naive (or maybe sinister) from all concerned ....maybe they were doing their 'lets create a narrative' thing for telly 

The disciplinary will hopefully clarify the massive difference with a hefty Hurrell ban 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

10 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Can you imagine if Bentley had been playing

Ha ha....it would have been spectacular

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

20 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Couldn't hear the post match stuff last night so just watching it now.

Absolutely no class there at all. Spoilt brats on and off the pitch...

It really was....a deliberate decision to try and spol a famous Leeds win?......that I predicted (though I admit I sort of then unpredicted it)

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

On 02/03/2023 at 11:12, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Yes Wilkin will be unbearable 

Have to say I admire your bravery going to this one 

Having said that I like to be a lone voice so....

Newman plays - shuts down Saints and then scores a hat trick 

Leeds by 16

Can someone please acknowledge I was right about the win

Edited March 4, 2023 by Bedfordshire Bronco

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

On 02/03/2023 at 11:14, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Jesus H Christ .....just sent he odds 

Lee's are 7-1 .....incredible and never thought I'd see that ever happen 

Got to be worth a punt surely?

See

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

On 02/03/2023 at 12:09, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I'm surprised there is that many 

Have to say the downside for Saints of being so dominant means travelling fans won't bother  

To be honest the only Saints games I would be remotely interested in watching live this year would be Wire away and Wigan away....in fact I'll probably not even be that keen to watch them on telly much either 

Although this one of mine didn't age well

[Padge]

21 minutes ago, Dave T said:

 

 

My understanding is that where the contact lands wouldn't specify whether it is a shoulder charge or not. It could be illegal round the waist, in the back, or on the head. It us the tackle'rs action, which I would say is broadly covered by the arm being tucked and no attempt to tackle properly. 

I expect the rotation point is a feature that they look for in these tackles locally. 

Again, we should remember that shoulder charges are not that big an offence, it is the contact to the head which is serious. Hurrell was not sent off for the shoulder charge, he was sent off for direct contact with the head. 

When you hear the refs talking about things like 'rotation' what you are hearing is how they try to judge an incident i.e. did the player turn to us the side of his shoulder as opposed to hitting somene with the front of the shoulder. The front of the shoulder is used often in tackling.

I agree about him being sent off for direct head contact, I als agree with others that comparing the two incidents is laughable.

[Chrispmartha]

On 02/03/2023 at 15:37, Chrispmartha said:

Sezer MOM

Whilst we are on about old posts aging well

[Dave T]

18 minutes ago, Padge said:

When you hear the refs talking about things like 'rotation' what you are hearing is how they try to judge an incident i.e. did the player turn to us the side of his shoulder as opposed to hitting somene with the front of the shoulder. The front of the shoulder is used often in tackling.

I agree about him being sent off for direct head contact, I als agree with others that comparing the two incidents is laughable.

Agreed, its what I was clumsily trying to say. Rotation may be a key indicator that there is no attempt to make a proper tackle, and be part of their coaching on what to look for, rather than a written part of the laws. 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

19 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Whilst we are on about old posts aging well

You negated it with the wink so it does it count !!

[Josef K]

Although i am bitterly disappointed we lost last night, i thought Leeds deserved it. Saints only have themselves to blame with poor discipline yet again (Sironen & Matautia - surprise surprise) and our dreadful tackling, and a poor kicking game. Two of the Leeds’s tries were breathtaking and although it hurts you can do nothing but applaud such fantastic tries. Is the Leeds prop called Sangare ! What a brilliant player. 
Saints have been ripped to bits twice out on the flanks now in the last two games, we lacked pace last night, Makinson is a very good player but isn’t as fast as he used to be. I really like Bennison but he isn’t a winger for me. I also don’t understand in having four subs but only using three, but that bench was lightweight last night. 

[Tippytoe]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I'm not sure that is clearly defined tbh. It'll be interesting know if there is clear, published definition of an illegal shoulder charge. 

We should remember, tackling with the shoulder is still absolutely legal, and in fact forms part of almost every tackle. What was outlawed was the reckless turning side on, tucking the arm and making no attempt to complete a legitimate tackle. This tackle didn't really have any of those features. 

I know RU are far stricter on attempts to wrap your arms, but I'm not sure we have ever gone down the route of being quite so strict.

We should never compare codes its a totally different sport Rl shouldn't be diluted like the ginger beer brigade. 

[Tippytoe]

26 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Whilst we are on about old posts aging well

I got pinged for using the M word

[Chrispmartha]

6 minutes ago, Josef K said:

Although i am bitterly disappointed we lost last night, i thought Leeds deserved it. Saints only have themselves to blame with poor discipline yet again (Sironen & Matautia - surprise surprise) and our dreadful tackling, and a poor kicking game. Two of the Leeds’s tries were breathtaking and although it hurts you can do nothing but applaud such fantastic tries. Is the Leeds prop called Sangare ! What a brilliant player. 
Saints have been ripped to bits twice out on the flanks now in the last two games, we lacked pace last night, Makinson is a very good player but isn’t as fast as he used to be. I really like Bennison but he isn’t a winger for me. I also don’t understand in having four subs but only using three, but that bench was lightweight last night. 

I must admit i did get a bit of hope when i saw your bench.

good to see a saints fan acknowledging our trys as i think the quality of them is being overshadowed by the talk of shoulder charges.

Saints will be fine but they won’t have it all their own terms this year as I think A. Opposition teams have figured out how to play against them and B. A few other teams are stronger this year. The Saints Wire games should be epic!

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, Tippytoe said:

I got pinged for using the M word

Ooops you’re quite right, POM.

[dkw]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

 

 

My understanding is that where the contact lands wouldn't specify whether it is a shoulder charge or not. It could be illegal round the waist, in the back, or on the head. It us the tackle'rs action, which I would say is broadly covered by the arm being tucked and no attempt to tackle properly. 

I expect the rotation point is a feature that they look for in these tackles locally. 

Again, we should remember that shoulder charges are not that big an offence, it is the contact to the head which is serious. Hurrell was not sent off for the shoulder charge, he was sent off for direct contact with the head. 

I don't remember too many on here questioning the Hurrell red thankfully, that was fully deserved the daft sod, could have been very nasty.

[Barry Badrinath]

31 minutes ago, Josef K said:

Although i am bitterly disappointed we lost last night, i thought Leeds deserved it. Saints only have themselves to blame with poor discipline yet again (Sironen & Matautia - surprise surprise) and our dreadful tackling, and a poor kicking game. Two of the Leeds’s tries were breathtaking and although it hurts you can do nothing but applaud such fantastic tries. Is the Leeds prop called Sangare ! What a brilliant player. 
Saints have been ripped to bits twice out on the flanks now in the last two games, we lacked pace last night, Makinson is a very good player but isn’t as fast as he used to be. I really like Bennison but he isn’t a winger for me. I also don’t understand in having four subs but only using three, but that bench was lightweight last night. 

Its worthwhile to keep an eye on how the Australia trip affects your season,  you've peaked once this year,  could take a few weeks to get in the swing of it again.

 

I know giving players 3 days off is a welfare thing and absolutely the right thing to do, but it might contribute more, negatively.

 

We shall see.

[Oxford]

3 minutes ago, dkw said:

I don't remember too many on here questioning the Hurrell red thankfully, that was fully deserved the daft sod, could have been very nasty.

His reaction after going off should increase any punishment, shame like him as a player.

I think there were quite a few bit of contesting from players some merited but some like Hurrell questionable to say the least.

It is interesting that it seems fans sided with one of the rounds decisions against the ref whereas one was mostly pundits having a go. I could be mistaken here, I've not checked thoroughly but it is the way it seemed to me.

Any loss, no matter what the reason, should not turn into a trauma or a drama.

 

[Dunbar]

15 hours ago, Jughead said:

Not at all. We have 27 rounds of drudgery and box ticking to get through as a sport

So refreshing to see the IMG team on here testing their marketing messages with genuine fans.

A true partnership. 

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

So refreshing to see the IMG team on here testing their marketing messages with genuine fans.

A true partnership. 

Indeed. To describe the sport we follow as that is just weird. This is it, this is the season, this is Super League - what do people actually want? 

If that's how existing fans describe it, the sooner we get new ones the better. 

Edited March 4, 2023 by Dave T

[bobbruce]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I'm not sure that is clearly defined tbh. It'll be interesting know if there is clear, published definition of an illegal shoulder charge. 

We should remember, tackling with the shoulder is still absolutely legal, and in fact forms part of almost every tackle. What was outlawed was the reckless turning side on, tucking the arm and making no attempt to complete a legitimate tackle. This tackle didn't really have any of those features. 

I know RU are far stricter on attempts to wrap your arms, but I'm not sure we have ever gone down the route of being quite so strict.

Which is why I think Wellens is asking for clarity here. His comments suggest Saints have quite a few players who would like to get back to tackling like this they just need the advice from the RFL as to what is or isn’t acceptable. 

[V02]

4 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

You've answered your own question there pal...he shouldn't be 120kg even at his height playing league....impact prop or not 

Always amazes me how clueless people can be about the need for proper conditioning in league forwards. Equally amazes me how apologetic people can be of lazy trainers 

Why not? Which areas of the game demonstrated a lack of fitness? And what evidence do you have of him being a lazy trainer? 

[Dunbar]

Edit

Edited March 4, 2023 by Dunbar

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, bobbruce said:

Which is why I think Wellens is asking for clarity here. His comments suggest Saints have quite a few players who would like to get back to tackling like this they just need the advice from the RFL as to what is or isn’t acceptable. 

Aye, like Saints worry about legal tackles