He strikes me as a typical (or stereotypical?) halfback. He's sly, sneaky, a pain in the backside and tough as old boots. Should be good for many years to come.

While there is no doubting Eastmonds ability, he simply doesn't have a 1/4 of the heart Tomkins has. Tomkins takes shlt loads and gets up everytime. When things go Saints way Eastmond is a cracking player. I just doubt he has the heart to play at the top and thus will never be fit to lace Tomkins boots.

FWIW Wellens was class yesterday for you. Had that break he made been 2-3 years ago I reckon he probably would have finished it and why Potter has let Matty Smith go is beyond me

Fair enough - you see your team every week.

Wigan fan mate.....

Huh?

Matty made such an impact because his kicking was fabulous against Warrington and our whole team that night played as one, something we haven't seen much of this season (and we haven't seen anything of a kicking game for years).

Matty Smith has only played at Superleague level consistently for one season: while at Salford. Prior to Saturday he had never played in a Saints-Wigan derby before and he had never played in a final before. That lad had a huge amount of pressure on him and he was never, ever going to meet the expectations created by his great game against Warrington. But even though his kicking in the first half was poor, he still worked hard in both defence and attack, he made the initial break for Dixon's try and he passed to Wilkin who, if he'd not dropped the ball, would have scored another try. He also kicked one great kick in the second half. But my own thoughts are that the occasion was just too much for him to handle with so little experience and such a genuine desire to work hard for his club, all the dumb changes made to the lineup by Potter complicating matters for him and everyone else.

However, it wasn't his fault we were beaten and I certainly wish he had been kept on by Saints.

I would imagine the coach is consulted, wouldn't you? Presumably as the 'expert opinion' on who was worth keeping at the club and who wasn't.

He's a player I've never really rated but I would say he would have been a better "keep" than Scott Moore.

Probably, but if McManus was sitting down planning for next season, surely your new coach would have had a say. After all, it'll be him who'll have to work with the players day in, day out.

Sorry - re read your post. The "They've" part should have been a give away really

True. But his contract was up this season so I would imagine there was pressure to make a decision about him, even though Saints didn't actually bother contacting him while he was out on loan.

I think Matty Smith would grow as a player if he just had some consistency in his first grade experience. Even in the few weeks he has been with us, he has been messed about, with Kyle out of the team then in it then out of it, so he wasn't able to build up any confidence going towards the Grand Final. It was a big ask for him to be the 7 in his first derby at his first grand final for a team who didn't actually want him. I'm well impressed by his courage in taking it on and he certainly showed us what he is capable of against Warrington. He was a joy to watch.

Can't see that at all. The reason why is between them Moore has a rugby brain and Smith doesn't in the same way that Tomkins has and Long hadn't at the same age. If Moore can get rid of his handling errors he will be a useful squad player. If he finds a bit more inside of himself he could even become a key player in the way that we're still waiting for Wilkin to do. A lot of it is about consistency with these good players whereas Smith may have a more consistent game it is only occasionally that it rises to grade B or above. That's not good enough level of performance for us to maintain our title challenges.