I think in a match against most teams, we score on at least 4 occasions last night - Makinson in the corner in the second half, Swift in the first and Percival twice. Souths just scrambled very well in defence when necessary, and on occasions we let them off lightly by not completing sets or kicking on 3rd tackle etc. Our completion was 50-60% throughout the match, I think Souths were something like 85% first half and 93% second half. Without us matching that, it was always going to be a huge struggle.

On the topic of Lomax, I think while there are times where his positioning isn't great, it's being made to look worse than it is at the minute as generally we're only dropping back the open side winger and the fullback for most kicks, rather than both wingers. This means Lomax has to be more in a corner, which obviously allows us to cover the threat of running the ball a bit easier, but means there's a hell of a lot more space for them to kick into.

For example, for their fourth try, Lomax covers so that Makinson doesn't have to drop back, so that Souths don't have an overlap on the blind side. However as a result, Swift probably needs to push over a bit more to cover for this. Between the two of them they don't communicate enough to cover the big gap, and Souths exploit this, yet how many other teams would have done so?
rlrl

For Souths' first try of the game, Lomax is caught out of position and pretty much in the defensive line. However, this is because Souths got a quick PTB from Inglis, so Masoe is caught on the wrong side of the play the ball - If Lomax wasn't there, there's 4 Souths players on the blind side and 3 attackers (Makinson is out of shot). Reynolds is smart enough to spot this and take advantage, but the previous tackles in the set Lomax was 15m behind the defensive line. The only reason he moved out of position was to cover for other players.
rlrl

On a positive note, our defense in the middle was reasonable solid. We got exposed on the edges - our wingers were okay but Burns and Wilkin made some wrong decisions and Turner was exposed by some good footwork. Through the middle we didn't really give much, despite the obvious talent in the Souths pack. While not at the speed of Souths' kick chases, our chase wasn't too bad despite some pretty ordinary kicking.

I think we massively missed Walsh. Obviously for the kicking he would have provided too (and this was a big factor), but also that bit of game sense and direction that Wilkin lacks as a halfback. There was one occasion in the first half where we kicked on the 3rd, about 30-40m out. If it had stayed in it would have been a decent kick, but it went dead and was a huge let off for Souths, while if we had kept the ball till last, we would have been in a pretty decent position to challenge for a kick. Percival looked dangerous on at least 3 occasions but we didn't seem to notice this, instead we sent a lot of traffic down our left at Walker who's obviously a lot more accomplished than Goodwin and Reddy.

I think some of our young blokes stood up pretty well - Greenwood, Thompson and Percival in particular. It's just unfortunate that we played what is probably one of the best club rugby league teams ever last night. Lots of lessons to be learned but the effort was there, and Souths would have done that to anyone in Super League on last night's showing, along with lots of NRL clubs.

Well I see over-reactions are well and truely up and running.

It's worth pointing out that the Salary cap was not always this big. It used to be a lot closer. Yet in those days with the likes of Cunningham, Long and Scully we still got schooled by the aussies.

Also as has been pointed out Canterbury Bull dogs shipped a load of points against this side.

Our defense was ok, but on the line, they were far quicker than us. The were far quicker in terms of shifting the numbers. There was a play last night that LMS knocked down and they scored. Before the ball was played 2 South's shifted across. Making a 3 on 3 a five on 3. Knock the ball down was the best option as otherwise it was an overlap. That's not bad individual play, that's poor reading as a defensive outfit. Whoever was matching the numbers did not see them shifting the players across (usually coached by the guy in blue, squatting behind and then giving the plays).

On the other hand when we got an overlap, Inglis was outstanding. A few times he came across so quick that he closed a gap other teams would never have been able to shut.

Very easy to jump off the deep end after a bad loss. But sometimes you just have to say they were better. They were and that does not mean in 12 months time the same result would ensue.

Upping the salary cap won't make that much difference really at the moment considering that most of the clubs don't have the money to spend the current cap so increasing it at the moment will only increase the gap.
We need to improve the quality of our juniors and improve the quality of the junior comps (improve one and you will improve the other) to make the transition into SL easier because it's clear that even the elite players in the U19s are way off the required standard at the moment.

You've just got to admire the defence of the NRL teams, you were about 6 inches away from having 18 points on the board (if your kicker had his boots on).
In our game (Wigan), the tackle on Burgess when he was over the line was unbelievable, he scores there against any team over here, I can imagine you're on a bit of a downer at the moment but you've got to realise Souths are a level above everything in the NRL and several levels above everyone in SL.
I'm just glad we weren't playing them last night, our front row would have been smashed to pieces !

just typical Saints, top class one week, turnstyles the next.

Lose this one, win the next....

People don't have the first clue what they're talking about.

What was Lomax at fault for tonight ? Not sitting deep on the 3rd tackle for South's very first set of the night attacking our try line ? No full back would be deep at that point. It was exceptionally clever rugby from a truly brilliant scrum half in Reynolds.

He wasn't at fault for any others either but by all means, those who need someone to pick on, carry on.

Crazy when it's Wiganers providing the most sensible posts on here. Some of you Saints 'fans' need to get a grip.

There's no disgrace losing to Souths. I wouldn't say comparing NRL to SL is like comparing SL to lower league football. But we're definitely heading in that direction. They have more money, players and resources. And the gap will continue to grow. There's not an awful lot we can do about this.

Last night we got off to a bad start. We needed to get some points on the board to calm our nerves and we almost did when Percival went over.

It's disappointing. But I can't say I ever had us down as favourites in the first place. When the Australian press describe this Souths side as one of the best in modern times you have to take it seriously.

I don't want to pin any blame. The truth is that set of players have performed miracles recently and there's no need to make rash decisions after being beaten by a standard of rugby we will never encounter in SL.

Has I've already said, I don't believe there's this huge gulf in quality. The one thing that can't be denied is they've got the weather. Open your curtains over there in morning and chances are the sun is shining. What kid wouldn't want to get out there and play sports. You get bigger, stronger, faster, that heat is great for the muscles and joints too. You can throw that ball about, learn fancy tricks etc

You wake up here as a kid, for most of the year it's frigging freezing, wet, windy...thus harder on the muscles and joints. The ball gets dropped more...you're playing under 14's for Blackbrook on a cold, rainy morning, do you throw that ball about or do you hold the ball closer and try to maintain possession.

I'm rambling on but I think you'll get the jist. The weather plays a big part in the development of ball sports with kids. And we have crap weather.

On the question of backs. I'm not particularly concerned right now. Percival is a young kid learning his trade and he'll improve a lot. Turner was moved to all manner of positions last season as cover and it didn't surprise me that he was caught out. Swift is only occupying the wing position until he gets an opportunity to move inside where I reckon he'll be far more effective. Lomax probably needed reminding about the rules of the game given the amount of time he spent out last season and Makinson is perfectly fine.

This Saints team is weighted primarily in favour of the forwards. And that's OK by me because tough go-forward packs win SL titles. If other teams want to spend big on strike centres or speedy wingers that's super. I'm sure they'll see some great tries on their way out of the competition.

That said - I do think we are a little short-handed in the back division. We certainly need to look at bringing through another winger from the juniors.

If there's no "gulf" in quality - how do you explain our complete inability to win a test series in decades?

How do you explain losing recently with the best pack of forwards in living memory against practically a reserve side?

You can't just say it's the weather.

Part of the problem with WCC is its one-off nature. It's hard to learn a great deal from one game if you are a player. I'd much prefer getting pasted in a best-of-three games competition because the players would then see what playing week-to-week at NRL level really entails.

Whilst I agree, they were very very good, I thought we were pretty bad. If we had played to our full ability we would still have lost but by a less embarrassing margin.

True. I was on about club level though mate. That said, internationally, had it not have been for a dodgy decision at the death, we'd have knocked them out the Tri Nations. And to be fair, England represented themselves pretty well in that tournament as did Warrington and Wigan in the club matches.

There might not be a great deal of difference between the top players. But they have a lot more. And that advantage is multiplied by intensity repeated week-after-week.

It's not something we are ever likely to match.

Truth is we've had two golden opportunities to beat Australia - once when they toured with practically a fifth strength outfit several years ago - and during the last tournament. If anything we fielded a stronger team in both games and yet still lost because they know how to play under the kind of pressure we just aren't capable of generating in SL.

It's somewhat disheartening knowing our competition is second-rate in comparison. But I guess it's that or embracing Onion.

To me one of the most important differences is the cleverness of the play, associated with a higher standard of technical skill. South's first try, seeing the opportunity and executing the kick to capitalise on the opportunity exemplifies what I mean. As Judderman posted earlier, we and the rest of Superleague have a lot to learn from analysing their set ups, vision and execution.