You seem very angry and bitter. Get yourself to tescos for some new undies. Of course its only one game, nobody is saying differently. However your trying to take the gloss of a superb victory away to one of our title rivals. We dominated, end of. We will move on to the next game.

I find that a pretty harsh assessment, Saints definitely took their foot off the gas after half time but I can't blame them at 26-4 up and so comfortable. The fact is that the attack looked like scoring every time they got near the Wire line and the pack battered Wire's into submission. And that is with the team playing at what looked about 30% of its potential.

I thought we were patchy, but I don't want to be too harsh. It's never going to be slick the first game in. Last year Huddersfield scored a few more points than us and people where saying it was a hell uva beating.

So yes scrappy and probably heavy under foot, but I'm happy that as a team we are solid defensively. I get what you mean about Percival and Swift, but I think they upped there game as the game wore on.

Our defence kept us on top after some sloppy attacking play, however i think your being a little harsh. It's round 1 every team will improve as the season progresses. Excellent victory and Wigan never looked that structured against Huddersfield who maybe if Saints or Leeds where playing that night we may of out 50 on Wigan. All ifs and buts but every Saints fan should be made up with that victory.

I agree with St Pete. It was a pleasing performance, but by no means perfect. If we hadn't started trying to play touch rugby after 55 mins I think we could have racked up a really humiliating scoreline. Warrington looked like we did last year - their kicking game was rancid.

Positives: seeing Saints play with a proper half back partnership and a bit of mongrel up front. Some really determined defence.

Negatives: not as ruthless as we could have been in the 2nd half. Percy has a habit of flying in which led to Warrington's first try and a break shortly after. Something for him to work on.

Maybe Walsh ain't the key for us this season, maybe it's keeping Wheeler fit.

Our discipline stank, as seems to be the norm under Brown unfortunately, and Soliola deserves a ban (we were very lucky he wasn't sent off), but apart from that I thought we looked like a team that had been set free and Luke Walsh was key to that. Granted, that freedom meant some of the stuff we tried didn't work, but some of it did. And it was a joy to watch Luke Walsh in action. I thought he was great for Penrith but he was fabulous for us because IMO he is just what we have been lacking.

Good Performance overall.

The "D" was great from start to finish.

A lot more attempts to be creative even if they went wrong at times.
The quality of passing at times was annoying but the desire to try and shift the ball was great.
The kicking of Walsh was a breath of fresh air.

Walsh and Amor were good. The pack was mean and the backs offered threat and pace.
Wheeler did well but still has a lot of making up to do, good start though.

Percival looked a bit vulnerable at times but coped. Walmsley was really destructive and
then on occasion become self destructive.

Wilkin was poor between bouts of loving himself and show-boating. Manu suffered from being on the right
and would be much better on the left, which compounds the irritation with Wilkin.

Wellens was, as expected , accommodated as he is Mr St Helens.

Saints were exciting and good to watch again. There is really something genuine to build on here.

We did what we had to to.

For me, we gave up too much ball and our discipline was atrocious again. But great to see all 13 players knowing their role. Walsh looks very good and Wheeler complimented him really well. Nice to see our pack totally dominate too, but I suppose that's largely because the wolfs pack was awful.

Question masks still around Percival IMO. That first try was embarrassing to watch. If the wolfs had started GOB I think they'd have taken advantage of that more than they did.

It's a great starting point for us to improve from. Maybe if we played a top 4 team we could have taken more away from the game.

What is it with Walmsley and the play the ball.

He's like Achilles. A great big man mountain with a dodgy little chink in his Armour.

Disagree about wello, offered nothing in attack granted but he seemed to make a lot of tackles (along with jones) - more importantly the entire team calmed down when he came on and we cut out (most of) the silly penalties and regain some composure we had lacked.

Whilst not enough against Flanaghan potentially, it makes him a better option than hohaia personally!

Where the bloody hell have you been?!

I agree with this. Although I personally wouldn't play him, there was a noticeable effect when he came on to 'steady the ship'. We was playing quite erratically from about 45-60 minutes and we seemed to settle when he came on.

Forgot Jones. He was huge, lots of tackles but lots of important carries.

Wellens filled in a little at the end, nothing special.

Re No17 Hohaia has pace but no heart. Wellens has heart but no pace, Flannagan is an Aldi model.

Jones as super sub for me, along with Sia , Mose and Beaumont if he pans out..

Didn't that scoreline coming.....Good Grief !