B. the c/c just a minor distraction lmao

The problem lies with the concept that the Challenge Cup is devalued because it is nowt but a Knockout comp played by amateur and pro's alike, but is not supported by SKY. Whereas the grand final being a knockout comp for the top eight teams IS supported and hailed by the Sky pundits, aka the Ex-Pat and the Cheshire cat,( who think that THEY are the only voice in rugby league), as being the ultimate final

I wonder what the attendence comparison is between the GF and CC?

I always maintain that this team would blow away many champion teams
1. Paul Wellens
2 Sean Hoppe
3 Kevin Iro
4 Paul Newlove - Newlove made Senior look stupid time in time out.
5 Anthony Sullivan
6 Tommy Martyn
7 Sean Long
8 Dave Fairleigh
9 Keiron Cunningham
10 Sonny Nickle
11 Chris Joynt
12 Peter Shiels
13 Paul Sculthorpe

Hoppe and Iro combination, what a winner that was.

Sonny Knuckles at prop though? Over our Jammer?

That was the team from 2001, Syd...

No team in the decade would get close to it. It had Scully, Long and KC at their peak, and Dave Fairleigh was a star buy...

Of course if you were losing send in Sonny to break a few jaws where as FGB would stand there point, jump up and down, spit him dummy out and walk off in a huff.

The team that didn't make the GF?

They probably would. That team finished 4th in the league in 2001

Well spotted, but to me I don't really care. It was the continuation of the 2000 team and defeated probably thre best NRL team to visit these shores this decade. I am aware that the value of WCC's is questioned, but the Brisbane one was a great game.

The team ran out of steam that year. We won the CC, but came to a stuttering end due to a bad run of injuries - I think it was the season where Millward used the F word something like 30-odd times in a minute after one match...

For pure rugby the 2000 -2001 Saints team was probably the best and most stylish IMO.

Nice buffing but your team of the decade still finished 4th behind Hull and failed to make the grand final

Since 2000 leeds have won more titles than any other super league team.

So in that sense i guess they have a claim as the title is the main trophy teams aim for.

But saints have won far more CC's and overall trophies since then. So saints are still the best team of the last decade.

When judging something like this you have to go on trophies.

Someone earlier in the thread was quoting a line up and a style of play and claiming that was the team of the decade.

But that saints team finished 4th (a leeds team in heavy transition finished just behind them) and they didn't even collect the title. So it's ludicrous to suggest that side is the team of the decade.

I think in future when people look back on the recent era (last 5 or so years) saints will be remembered as a great team who never won the titles they should have.

Leeds have won 4 titles in the last 6 years, if they can remain up there for another 4 years then maybe they can claim the decade from 2004 to 2014.