Fri 29th March : SL : St Helens v Wigan Warriors KO 3pm Sky Sports Action/Main Event

[daz39]

2 hours ago, Loiner said:

Lewis Dodd vastly overrated.

I thought that, it's almost like he's in the team as he is a homegrown player and they are hoping he turns into a Lomax/Welsby.

Don't think i'd be over chuffed if we signed him, massively overated player in my opinion.

[JohnM]

Given the pastings Saints have dished out to us over the years, I was pleased that at least we survived. There was no room for either side to dodge, dart and weave to victory. Indeed, it was really only in the last few minutes that it became clear who was most likely to win. Field and French were largely kept quiet by Saints lightning fast defensive responses. Equally, our defence handled Walmsley and Welsby well. As has been mentioned previously, one red, one yellow, too many penalties and too many  six agains means we need to improve our discipline. Could have won, should have won, didn't win...and we've only ourselves to blame.

[Padge]

16 minutes ago, daz39 said:

Exactly my take on it, great piece of skill, but absolutely no control on the grounding though but it has to be a try cos the ref on the field who wasn't sure if it was a try guessed it might have been a try and the video ref who can see it isn't or shouldn't be a try cannot say that as the ref has already had a guess.....scrap the damn thing altogether!.

You are talking bollards, the views given to the VR did not show separation, the VR had no evidence to overturn the on-field call.

The fact that later shots, not used by the VR showed that he may have lost control, are actually a back up for increased investment in VR technology.

If the ref calls try, and the cameras then show he is wrong, without redress to a review, there would be hell to play.

VR was brought in because technology (and Sky money) was catching refs out when they gave bad calls based just on their view.

Edited March 29 by Padge

[Damien]

 

 

[Chrispmartha]

40 minutes ago, Padge said:

Depends on your definition, some people love huge defensive effort games, others high scoring try fests.

This one fell into the first category, if you wanted tries it would therefore be below par.

I enjoy highly defensive games.

I’ve no issues with huge defensive displays. However both team’s attack was pretty poor so not sure how good that defensive effort was.

A truly great game for me has both.

[Padge]

18 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I’ve no issues with huge defensive displays. However both team’s attack was pretty poor so not sure how good that defensive effort was.

A truly great game for me has both.

The whole point of great defensive efforts is that it makes the attack become ineffectual, ergo poor.

 

[meast]

It was like two old heavyweight boxers slugging it out for 10 rounds, both giving it everything but then one of them pulls out 2 cracking punches to end the contest.

Not the best quality but hugely entertaining and a proper battle.

Edited April 1 by meast

[bobbruce]

6 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I thought the final replay from the side (not the video ref replay, the one after) showed pretty clearly he got it down.

I think that and a couple of tackles by Makinson on Wardle may be looked at this week. 

[NRLandSL]

5 hours ago, Loiner said:

Lewis Dodd vastly overrated.

Can’t agree with this, he’s had a great start to the year.

 

[NRLandSL]

8 hours ago, Roy Haggerty said:

There is no substitute for speed. If saints leave a single gap, Wigan will score. If Wigan leave a gap, there’s no guarantee Saints will score simply because Field and French are so fast. 
 

Saints must either learn this lesson or settle for runner-up for the foreseeable future. 
 

 

Alex Walmsley says otherwise, ran straight over Field and French. So did Hurrell at the end.

Edited March 30 by NRLandSL

[GeordieSaint]

6 hours ago, NRLandSL said:

Alex Walmsley says otherwise, ran straight over Field and French. So did Hurrell at the end.

To be fair, RH talks about a gap. He was right. Look at Dodd in the first half when Field caught him and dragged him into touch. Walmsley and Hurrell both ran over people…

[Roy Haggerty]

1 hour ago, GeordieSaint said:

To be fair, RH talks about a gap. He was right. Look at Dodd in the first half when Field caught him and dragged him into touch. Walmsley and Hurrell both ran over people…

And also, he didn’t score - he was caught by the defence and no supporting saints players were fast enough to get into position for a pass before the break was ended. 
 

I was as relieved as any saints fan when we scored, but we scored two very close range tries in the last 8 minutes of the game against a side who’d played 20 minutes with 12 men. We can’t rely on cards to knacker out an opposition enough to allow us to barge over!

[Harry Stottle]

One thing that game did show/confirm that even at his ripe old age when in the mood as he was yesterday Alex Walmersley is still the best front row in the competition.

On the cards, what Dupree did with the elbow is the most despicable action on a RL field it is like being hit with a ball pein hammer, there was a time when those teammates of the player receiving the elbow would have made sure the offender left the field and very quickly, I hope he gets many matches there should be no mitigating circumstances as an excuse the raising of the elbow is intent to cause damage, and Liam Byrne could also be looking at keeping a seat in the grandstand warm for a few weeks, if his action is compared to what Liam Watts got 4 games for it was far worse.

[corvusxiii]

Just noticed that there are more HYS comments on this game than the RU match. Don't think I've ever seen this before. 

[Roy Haggerty]

25 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

One thing that game did show/confirm that even at his ripe old age when in the mood as he was yesterday Alex Walmersley is still the best front row in the competition.

On the cards, what Dupree did with the elbow is the most despicable action on a RL field it is like being hit with a ball pein hammer, there was a time when those teammates of the player receiving the elbow would have made sure the offender left the field and very quickly, I hope he gets many matches there should be no mitigating circumstances as an excuse the raising of the elbow is intent to cause damage, and Liam Byrne could also be looking at keeping a seat in the grandstand warm for a few weeks, if his action is compared to what Liam Watts got 4 games for it was far worse.

Byrne was very similar to the challenge Percival himself was carded for against Salford. So I expect a similar 2 match ban. 

[Harry Stottle]

6 minutes ago, corvusxiii said:

Just noticed that there are more HYS comments on this game than the RU match. Don't think I've ever seen this before. 

What are HYS comments? 

[phiggins]

On the Dupree one, I don’t know how the same mitigation factors for a high tackle can apply to someone that is leading with the forearm? A tackle is a legitimate thing to do, Dupree’s action wasn’t. 

[redjonn]

11 hours ago, Padge said:

You are talking bollards, the views given to the VR did not show separation, the VR had no evidence to overturn the on-field call.

The fact that later shots, not used by the VR showed that he may have lost control, are actually a back up for increased investment in VR technology.

If the ref calls try, and the cameras then show he is wrong, without redress to a review, there would be hell to play.

VR was brought in because technology (and Sky money) was catching refs out when they gave bad calls based just on their view.

I think your right and I agree with the current process and as such agree a try should have been awarded if VR could not see an obvious reason not to give.

Never-the-less I thought that the action replays shown that the VR was viewing showed he didn't have control and one showed in my opinion that the ball left his hands and as such a knock on equivalent.  The VR didn't keep viewing that full on angle.  The other angles didn't show that separation as clearly.   As such if the VR can not see it as an obvious drop or loss of control its a Try as the ref gave it up as a try.   In normal speed surely that's what he would have thought, a Try but he did ask for it to be checked.

To me it was a good example of the process.  Otherwise back to benefit of the doubt and awarding the attacking team.

It was as much lack of control as the Leeds try against Cas...  rightly awarded as the ref sent it up viewing it in normal speed.

 

Edited March 30 by redjonn

[GeordieSaint]

11 minutes ago, phiggins said:

On the Dupree one, I don’t know how the same mitigation factors for a high tackle can apply to someone that is leading with the forearm? A tackle is a legitimate thing to do, Dupree’s action wasn’t. 

I thought the Dupree one was a shocker. I haven’t seen a player carry the ball like that for a long time. He was a very lucky lad to only get a yellow IMO. 

[corvusxiii]

35 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

What are HYS comments? 

Oops! It's on the Sports section of the BBC England News page. Have Your Say allows people to comment on that item. The two matches are side by side so couldn't miss it. Never seen RL outscore RU before. 

[Harry Stottle]

45 minutes ago, corvusxiii said:

Just noticed that there are more HYS comments on this game than the RU match. Don't think I've ever seen this before. 

Hi Corvus, I was being serious this is the only social media I do, I have not a clue what HYS comments are, please explain.

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, corvusxiii said:

Oops! It's on the Sports section of the BBC England News page. Have Your Say allows people to comment on that item. The two matches are side by side so couldn't miss it. Never seen RL outscore RU before. 

Thanks, ignore my last post we must have been typing at the same time.

[Roy Haggerty]

25 minutes ago, redjonn said:

I think your right and I agree with the current process and as such agree a try should have been awarded if VR could not see an obvious reason not to give.

Never-the-less I thought that the action replays shown that the VR was viewing showed he didn't have control and one showed in my opinion that the ball left his hands and as such a knock on equivalent.  The VR didn't keep viewing that full on angle.  The other angles didn't show that separation as clearly.   As such if the VR can not see it as an obvious drop or loss of control its a Try as the ref gave it up as a try.   In normal speed surely that's what he would have thought, a Try but he did ask for it to be checked.

To me it was a good example of the process.  Otherwise back to benefit of the doubt and awarding the attacking team.

It was as much lack of control as the Leeds try against Cas...  rightly awarded as the ref sent it up viewing it in normal speed.

 

I didn't have an issue with the try as I knew I'd be calling it a try if the shirts had been swapped. My main beef was that the quality of the picture on the slo-mo was really bad. I don't know if I'm mis-remembering, but I thought we used to have much clearer frame-by-frame pictures than that blurry mess. But that may be just age withering my memory.

[Harry Stottle]

36 minutes ago, phiggins said:

On the Dupree one, I don’t know how the same mitigation factors for a high tackle can apply to someone that is leading with the forearm? A tackle is a legitimate thing to do, Dupree’s action wasn’t. 

The forearm is bad enough, that was distinctly the elbow which was the more prominent part of the arm.

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, Roy Haggerty said:

I didn't have an issue with the try as I knew I'd be calling it a try if the shirts had been swapped. My main beef was that the quality of the picture on the slo-mo was really bad. I don't know if I'm mis-remembering, but I thought we used to have much clearer frame-by-frame pictures than that blurry mess. But that may be just age withering my memory.

On the cameras and quality, I have said it before Sky are doing it as cost effectivly as possible there are simply not enough camers and angles being utilised, I watch a lot of the NRL and the difference is massive there are a least 6 angles for the 'Bunker' to make a judgement on.