Yes. But we simply cannot ever let Leeds go two scores ahead and hope to win. We either score first or lose, and Leeds know that, which is why they play like frantic madmen in the first ten minutes of every game. And we haven't found a way to cope with that yet. I see Leeds scoring in this set too. They have our defence rattled every time they pass twice inside our twenty.

Luke Walsh was the difference between the two sides. I'll add nothing more on the subject.

Did Burns play tonight?

Regard

King James

No. Unfair to pick him out alone. Every one of our backs from 1 to 7 is inferior to his Leeds opposite number. Leeds have beaten us in the threequarters each time this year. We can't beat them unless the forwards are so dominant that their backs get no possession or territory. But Leeds have found a way of getting enough forward contest to free their backs, and their backs are just much better than ours.

Luke Walsh's defense lost us the game. His kicking game was absolutely disgraceful and that was when we had decent possession aswell. In that second half Walmsley, Jones and Savelio gave him a big enough plat form but he was sh@te.

I agree his kicking was much worse than Sinfield's. However, he was busy with ball in hand, and it wasn't his service which was poor, as he was frequently taking the ball to and across the line looking for support; it was the lack of runners hitting gaps at pace - probably because Vea and Greenwood were again injured. Also, if you watch Leeds' backs, so many of their breaks come from either individual skill from their threequarters, or interplay between them. Our threequarters simply can't do what Leeds' lads can. Only Percival has the footwork to evade a tackle, and neither centre-wing partnership has yet got anywhere close to the sort of instinctive understanding and ability to support each other than Leeds' pairs have.

Our forwards recovered from a horrible first 30 minutes to get on top, but the other aspect of our play we need to look at was pointed out I think by Davies - Leeds run inclumps, expecting the offload and ready to take advantage of breaks. Saints run one-up and hope that Quinlan happens to be there. Our second phase attack and close-quarter support play is terrible. Whereas Leeds forwards look to hit the ball up and offload to support, ours are clearly looking for yards and a quick PTB. We need to change that approach if we're to seriously challenge Leeds/Wigan/Wire, because we're not good enough to go around good teams, and yet we're not using our strongest attacking weapon of the forwards as effectively as we might.

You'd make an excellent solicitor for Walsh. Busy with ball in hand ? give over. I respect your opinion but it must be influenced with 6 or 7 pints.

And thats what me and Sado are referring to regarding our recruitment next year. Leeds have strike players with the ball yet we don't have one single go to player that has that strike power to blow a team away. We need strike players asap!

I'm obviously concerned with our defence (especially thst left edge) but I'm starting to worry about our halves massivley. Walsh and Burns can't manage close games and can't open up tight defences. I can't work out if it's the fact they just not doing it or it's down to coaching.

I don't thibk we are a bad team but we certainly not a great team. I think we will make the top four but soon as we meet leeds or wigan in the semis or the final they will beat us.

Sav was awesome tonight in a crap team that was overrun for 50 mins of the game. He showed real heart and pride in the shirt as did vea and walmsley.

Just got back from the match - I live in Warrington and my verdict was
a) we didn't turn up for 30 mins
b) inability to stop the Leeds offloads even though we knew they are the best off loading team in SL
c) kicking game was awful.

We could have been 30-0 down after 30 mins, so dominant were Leeds. But once we started to show more aggression we were in the game. Damage was done with offloads by Leeds virtually every tackle we didn't put the tackle away.

I can see why Leeds look good but stop the offloads and they are the same as everybody. Why we didn't learn that can only be down to the coaching pre-match.
It didn't help Vea going off - looked a bad one - and Greenwood and Mose playing on injured. Thought Greenwood put himself in danger all the time tonight to pick up an injury, he needs to direct his aggression properly.

Verdict - best team on the night won.

That's what it looked like on the TV, anyway. The halfback who was almost anonymous tonight was Burns, not Walsh (notwithstanding his great shot on JJB late on). I'm not saying Walsh was great : his kicking was poor, and his defence is awful. However, I think that Saints are a team with a surprisingly weak attacking structure. We are essentially relying on forwards getting to the opposition 20 and then falling over the line from short range. Walsh is potentially an attacking halfback who can actually create space and set up play, but we don't seem to be able to use that unless Vea's on the field.

I think his stats for missed tackles will be woeful. But I think his stats for carries/passes might surprise you - he was very involved tonight.

Savelio is one hell of a player.

Leeds too good more than Saints not being good enough for me.

I disagree; we were poor for most of the first half. Leeds were too good for us because of their off loading game. Stop that - and we didn't - Leeds are quite ordinary.

When dire beat them twice they were in their faces and stopped the Leeds game of offloading and beat them twice.

We were not fantastic but neither did we roll over and get our tummies tickled.

I'd give us a 6 or 7 out of 10.

But Leeds looked a better team.

Despite that we had our chances and we could have done better than we did.

Those first 2 tries were soft we just let players run across the front of us.

Unlike the last 2 games we were at least at the races next time we may turn up before the first race has finished.