I thought the ref allowed saints to slow the ruck which did kill us in the 2nd half. We also lost some line speed in D. They had quicker rucks which allowed them to play with structure.

I guess either saints are much quicker of the line or we are slower. Who knows.

Agreed that the first 30 was as good as we have played in the last few years. Just need more of it for longer.

Plus I think we need a bit of structure in plays. Can’t do off the cuff for 80 mins. Still lacking a wrecking ball. As good as lisone is in his 10 min spells, would like a bit more for longer.

I still think MoM and Fraeley will turn out to be duds. The former is unfortunately a downgrade on Nene.

I admire your optimism,and you make some valid points, sadly you gloss over the facts we never really troubled the Saints defence, they however made easy yardage against our defence. The big question is are we a good team playing poorly or just an average/poor team.

EVERY team makes easy yardage against us. Seeing teams go 80m in sets is frustratingly common and we are becoming more and more reliant on wonder plays / individual efforts to get ourselves out of our own 20. "passive defence" Im yet to be fully sold on.

it's a tactic. let the other side camp in our 40 for 70 minutes and, if we have any energy left, we'll win it late.

groundbreaking. all those great coaches over the years have got it all wrong.

The further you have to kick it the more time the defenders have to get under it.

There's a difference between an kick to a specific area of the field where your defenders know what to chase and the receiver knows (roughly) where to be to catch it on the full, and a varied kicking game that asks more of your chasers but puts the receivers under much more pressure. That difference is coaching and game plan, and we've clearly decided on the less risky strategy, which also gives the receiver an easier time and more yardage.