Fri 17th March : SL : St Helens v Hull FC 20:00 Sky

[jacksy]

1 minute ago, Roy Haggerty said:

Advantage isn’t just passing the point of the original offence though. You have to be deemed to have gained an advantage at the end of the play, and ending up in touch clearly isn’t an advantage. 

Fair point Roy. 

[Jughead]

8 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Who are you having a conversation with?

Your Super League trophy. 

[Old Frightful]

Well, disappointed obviously but a much improved effort after last weeks debacle.

Or was it?, I’m reading on here that Saints are miles off and missing a few players so perhaps we weren’t that great after all.

Possibly could have won but for the stoopid short drop out with just over a minute left of the first half and, with a little more composure, Dwyer scores.

I’m chuffed I went to the game and enjoyed it despite the result. 

Onwards and, hopefully, upwards…

 

[DimmestStar]

Saints at their worst were still able to grind out a win against Hull at their best.

Positives for Hull  from this game ....Taylor and Griffin seem to have found a bit of enthusiasm after 2 poor years. Playing for a contract?

Negatives  ..they did tire understandably after playing above themselves for an hour. They didn't offer an awful lot in the second half but had Dwyer held on that pass it might have been different. But apart form his show and go he's a very ordinary player. And Loveaducka...no way is he a super league player.

Saints though I think they are going to find it tough to hold on to their title. When you get into bad habits...and they have...it's tough to get back to ultra confident ways.

[Ullman]

1 hour ago, jacksy said:

How was that a saints scrum?

 

1 hour ago, MZH said:

Not convinced that was a knock on by Swift tbh, I thought it went backwards, and that's not even getting into whether Saints had the advantage. Good finish from Bennison though.

As the replays showed, Swift clearly knocked the ball towards his own goal line. Surprised nobody in the commentary team picked up on it but then again...

[StandOffHalf]

Bang average rugby.

I was falling asleep, aside from perking up at the glimpses from Messrs Welsby and Dodd.

I thought Hull's Clifford and Hoy were OK, with Griffin and Sao having strong showings.

I thought Phil Clarke made an astute point at HT about Makinson not having the same impact at centre. If their first-choice centres are out, Saints start to look pretty ordinary spreading and moving the ball.

 

[Ullman]

6 minutes ago, Old Frightful said:

Well, disappointed obviously but a much improved effort after last weeks debacle.

Or was it?, I’m reading on here that Saints are miles off and missing a few players so perhaps we weren’t that great after all.

Possibly could have won but for the stoopid short drop out with just over a minute left of the first half and, with a little more composure, Dwyer scores.

I’m chuffed I went to the game and enjoyed it despite the result. 

Onwards and, hopefully, upwards…

 

If that ball sits up for Dwyer we win the game but tonight was more about the performance than the result. Couldn't have asked for more in terms of commitment. 

Onwards and upwards. 

 

[Padge]

9 minutes ago, Old Frightful said:

Well, disappointed obviously but a much improved effort after last weeks debacle.

Or was it?, I’m reading on here that Saints are miles off and missing a few players so perhaps we weren’t that great after all.

Possibly could have won but for the stoopid short drop out with just over a minute left of the first half and, with a little more composure, Dwyer scores.

I’m chuffed I went to the game and enjoyed it despite the result. 

Onwards and, hopefully, upwards…

 

But don't foret that the Saints squad is such a well oiled machine it doesn't matter who they bring in.

I thought Hull were a little bit unlucky and a little bit "we blew it" tonight, also Tony Smiths play what you see aproach is fine if the ALL the players can see.

 

[DimmestStar]

Let's be honest as soon as Phil Clarke at half time requested  that he might change his prediction to a Hull win..... it was all over for the B&W's at that point.

[StandOffHalf]

As others have said, the Hull hooker should have bided his time and let his chickens hatch. He went too soon and ended up with cracked egg-shells and spilled egg-yolk. Just let it find its way into the in-goal and put a big mitten on the pill to nab the four-pointer.

He went to use the toilet but started going before sitting down. He'll have regret over letting the chance slip through his fingers.

[yipyee]

Impressed with Hull tonight, was a better fame than I was expecting and at times the game could have swong either way 

[JonM]

8 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Impressed with Hull tonight, was a better fame than I was expecting and at times the game could have swong either way 

Me too. I thought their forwards in particular really worked hard in defence, great linespeed throughout, and I'll be interested to see the tackle count for Brad Fash, who seemed to be everywhere.

[ckn]

Three posts removed. Come on. Just stupid. 

[Roy Haggerty]

2 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

Well, disappointed obviously but a much improved effort after last weeks debacle.

Or was it?, I’m reading on here that Saints are miles off and missing a few players so perhaps we weren’t that great after all.

Possibly could have won but for the stoopid short drop out with just over a minute left of the first half and, with a little more composure, Dwyer scores.

I’m chuffed I went to the game and enjoyed it despite the result. 

Onwards and, hopefully, upwards…

 

I don't want to rain on any parades, but the SKY mob did a good job of talking up a poor quality game. Like all RL, if you have two reasonably evenly matched sides without many scores between them, it can generate a degree of tension, but ultimately, neither side had any attack to mention. Two of the tries came from comical errors (the Hull drop out and the Saints knock on), and one was an appallingly soft pushover from a prop at the PTB. 

Saints didn't have Matautia and Batchelor as 1st choice 2nd row, Percival or Hurrell in the Centres, and our only remaining top winger was playing centre, leaving the wings with two backup squad players. Sironen looked gassed throughout, which is odd given he had a week sitting down, and you could tell that everyone was playing below par because they ended up giving MotM to Dodd, who had a pretty mediocre game, simply because they couldn't really think of anyone else, so the halfback gets it by default.

If either team tonight had been playing a team with a decent backline and the ability to pass, they'd have got fairly battered. I'm sure it was better than Hull played against Salford (could it be worse?), but Saints weren't anywhere near Salford's standard with ball in hand. We played very conservative one-up 5 drives and a kick rugby for most of that game, because we know we're out of sorts, and as Wellens said, went back to basics to try and avoid the third straight loss which would have certainly had pressure mounting on the new coach. Hull looked better at least in part because they were having to deal with a much less threatening attack than last week. The bit which I'd be worried about if I was a Hull fan, is that even against a Saints without both 1st choice flanks, and with an our-of-sorts pack, Hull only managed 1 fluke try and one soft pushover. 

Saints were there for the taking tonight, and sorry to say, but I think most other teams would have taken that opportunity like Leigh and Leeds did.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Roy Haggerty

[Roy Haggerty]

2 hours ago, StandOffHalf said:

 

I thought Phil Clarke made an astute point at HT about Makinson not having the same impact at centre. If their first-choice centres are out, Saints start to look pretty ordinary spreading and moving the ball.

 

You could really see how ineffective Makinson was (and all the threequarters) by the number of times the ball got to Lomax or Welsby on the flanks, and then turned back inside rather than going out. Either the playmakers weren't confident in giving the pass to the centres or - more likely - the centres just weren't in the right position to take a pass. Not helped, of course, by the absence of Matautia and Batchelor who usually play third man in on the attack. It felt at times like the halves were operating to invisible touchlines twenty metres infield from the ones the rest of us could see.

[Madrileño]

5 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

 

Or was it?, I’m reading on here that Saints are miles off and missing a few players so perhaps we weren’t that great after all.

Possibly could have won but for the stoopid short drop out with just over a minute left of the first half and, with a little more composure, Dwyer scores.

I’m chuffed I went to the game and enjoyed it despite the result.

Have just watched the whole game back, pausing it throughout.

In answer to your question...

You were far better defensively. Both in terms of effort (linespeed, numbers into the tackle, wrestle efforts, choke etc) and also technically (they looked like they had drilled some areas, particularly around getting numbers in, last man off squeezing, etc etc).

However in attack, you unfortunately simply don't look like a very good side. We call it SUPER League, but seriously.... some of the decision making is appalling:

-The short drop out as you say. (They did it again with 3:30 remaining and lost another score).

- In the first half they just kept shovelling the ball from edge to edge, not asking many questions of Saints D.

- The RIDICULOUS offloads having just regained possession.

-Running Exit Sets where they are throwing looping passes across the pitch against a numbers-up Saints. 

-The list could go on. 

It really is a mediocre product when one of your bigger clubs is playing at that level. Sorry.

I don't want to take credit away from them: they worked really hard and their defence was exceptional at times. (The half back's tackle on your left edge to save a try was outstanding). However it was so frustrating to watch. Saints were absolutely there for the taking tonight. Am glad you enjoyed it - it was entertaining if extremely frustrating. 

And that blue/white kit looks smart as well IMO. 

If it is any consolation, the ref was clearly more lenient on St Helens around the contact area than he was on your guys. 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Madrileño

[Fevrover]

9 hours ago, StandOffHalf said:

As others have said, the Hull hooker should have bided his time and let his chickens hatch. He went too soon and ended up with cracked egg-shells and spilled egg-yolk. Just let it find its way into the in-goal and put a big mitten on the pill to nab the four-pointer.

He went to use the toilet but started going before sitting down. He'll have regret over letting the chance slip through his fingers.

That's very good,have you thought of writing for League Express?  

[Chrispmartha]

20 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

That's very good,have you thought of writing for League Express?  

Chick bait articles?

[Oxford]

10 hours ago, jacksy said:

I'm baffled..

I'm not surprised with that one, I looked away for a moment  (honestly) and wondered what Saints were doing with the ball when I looked back?????

 

[MZH]

4 hours ago, Madrileño said:

Have just watched the whole game back, pausing it throughout.

In answer to your question...

You were far better defensively. Both in terms of effort (linespeed, numbers into the tackle, wrestle efforts, choke etc) and also technically (they looked like they had drilled some areas, particularly around getting numbers in, last man off squeezing, etc etc).

However in attack, you unfortunately simply don't look like a very good side. We call it SUPER League, but seriously.... some of the decision making is appalling:

-The short drop out as you say. (They did it again with 3:30 remaining and lost another score).

- In the first half they just kept shovelling the ball from edge to edge, not asking many questions of Saints D.

- The RIDICULOUS offloads having just regained possession.

-Running Exit Sets where they are throwing looping passes across the pitch against a numbers-up Saints. 

-The list could go on. 

It really is a mediocre product when one of your bigger clubs is playing at that level. Sorry.

I don't want to take credit away from them: they worked really hard and their defence was exceptional at times. (The half back's tackle on your left edge to save a try was outstanding). However it was so frustrating to watch. Saints were absolutely there for the taking tonight. Am glad you enjoyed it - it was entertaining if extremely frustrating. 

And that blue/white kit looks smart as well IMO. 

If it is any consolation, the ref was clearly more lenient on St Helens around the contact area than he was on your guys. 

I don't disagree with most of that, but it's kind of beside the point. We already know we have got a long way to go if we want to be up there challenging. Tony Smith has only been in the job 5 minutes and some of the players just simply aren't good enough. It's going to take a while. 

But the number one thing that has held us back in recent years is attitude. For everything else to come together it needs to built on a culture of togetherness and desire and effort. Technically we did a lot wrong, but we worked our socks off and gave a fully committed performance for the whole 80. That's encouraging and that's what we Hull fans are pleased with. 

[Josef K]

I’ve not read any posts on this match but i thought it was an abysmal game. FC played some nice RL and if they had won it near the end i wouldn’t have complained. Looking at it from a saints fan POV Lomax & Dodd are doing nothing, Walmsley comes in for a lot of stick from some Saints fans but Lees gets off lightly, he is invisible at times. I am no fan of Davies but i thought he had a great game, and although i would prefer Bennison at one he was my MoM. As for FC, i still really like Swift and i wished he’d have stayed at Saints. I also rate Dwyer he caused us some problems on, and Clifford had a good game. 

[Saint Toppy]

On 18/03/2023 at 00:52, Roy Haggerty said:

Saints didn't have Matautia and Batchelor as 1st choice 2nd row, Percival or Hurrell in the Centres, and our only remaining top winger was playing centre, leaving the wings with two backup squad players. Sironen looked gassed throughout, which is odd given he had a week sitting down, and you could tell that everyone was playing below par because they ended up giving MotM to Dodd, who had a pretty mediocre game, simply because they couldn't really think of anyone else, so the halfback gets it by default.

If either team tonight had been playing a team with a decent backline and the ability to pass, they'd have got fairly battered. I'm sure it was better than Hull played against Salford (could it be worse?), but Saints weren't anywhere near Salford's standard with ball in hand. We played very conservative one-up 5 drives and a kick rugby for most of that game, because we know we're out of sorts, and as Wellens said, went back to basics to try and avoid the third straight loss which would have certainly had pressure mounting on the new coach. Hull looked better at least in part because they were having to deal with a much less threatening attack than last week. The bit which I'd be worried about if I was a Hull fan, is that even against a Saints without both 1st choice flanks, and with an our-of-sorts pack, Hull only managed 1 fluke try and one soft pushover. 
 

It was a fairly poor quality game with 2 teams who looked more intent on not losing than actually going out and playing to try and win - far too conservative, especially from Saints.

Saints attack looked very clunky from the 3/4's, and while I get the Makinson to centre move was a last minute adjustment they had to make, it nullified one of his best assets in kick returns. Not having any specialist centres certainly limited their attacking capabilities, not helped by not having either of their 1st choice 2nd rowers creating either. Sironen is a good player but he picked up a leg injury in the 1st half and as the game wore on he struggled more & more. Had they not already lost Davies and been 1 substitution down then i'm sure Wellens would have taken him off.

There were a few pleasing things though, despite what Josef K might think, Dodd is slowly getting back to his best. He still looks reluctant to run at the line too much, but his short kicking game was excellent and put the Hull backs under a lot of pressure when defending their line. His fitness, timing & confidence i'm sure will grow as the season wears on.

The other positive is the fact they still pulled off a win despite playing fairly poorly and also knowing they have a lot of strike players to come back. They'll definately get Hurrell & Mata'utia back for the next game, and quite possible Percival & Hopoate as well, so the threat out wide will be massively improved.