Reading Royce comments in the programme, he states because of the amount of games we played last year, he thinks it's better having no proactive games and also says he gave players long holidays to be fresh for the season.

IMO you could tell we've not had much practice.

I agree that we need another friendly. Widnes were on their third and you could tell. But we aren't going to get another friendly and so we will just have to hope that those who didn't put 100% effort in/had a bad game/whatever will buck up their ideas next time out and that our combinations will be clearer to the coach as a result of tonight's match.

One thing's for sure, we need Gaskell on that pitch.

Training is nothing like your first match together as a team in months, and a new look team too (and you should know that as you've played the game!). There was clearly no Jammer putting in last ditch tackles tonight and I think Roby looked a bit lost at times without him on his shoulder. A few of our players need to step up. Unfortunately, without Jammer, and with us a bit at sea, the defensive frailties of a few of our players stuck out like sore thumbs. But we also showed some good signs. Makinson looked the business, Gaskell changed everything, Hohaia looks class in attack, Dixon impressed me. It will just take time.

Remember, we looked pretty shocking against Hudds in our friendly against them this time last year, but we still got to the Grand Final.

We defo need Gaskell on the pitch and playing stand off. He's the natural one of all our halves and his kicking game is 100 times better than lomax and lance.

I think lance and lomax are good players and highly rate both but I don't think they fit as halfbacks and would 100% play Gaskell at 6.

For me, friendly games are all about putting in to practice everything you e trained in pre season like moves, set plays and game plans. Tonight It was just one man rugby, nothing new at all.

That hit by sia was worth the ticket price tho!

As an outsider i'll be stunned if Gaskell isn't starting week in week out for Saints this season. He was exceptional at the back end of last season and doesn't deserve to lose his place.

I'd much prefare to play you with Wellens at 1, Hohaia at 6 and Lomax at 7 then I would with Hohaia at fullback and Gaskell and Lomax in the halves. It's a tough call to shift Wellens in to a new position or use him as your bench back (that Simmons seems to love) but I think it's one that needs to be made in all honesty.

It's Makinson at 1, Gaskell at 6 and Lomax at 7 that I want to see. Gaskell is our best attacking player and has the best kicking game at the club. Dropping him for Hohaia would be a monumental mistake.

I thought lance looked better when he moved to fullback, you could tell from the positions he got in that he's a out and out fullback.

I thought foster looked a liability on high balls again, if makinson can kick as good as people say then I'd drop foster and put tommy on wing.

Thats certainly a long term line up for you but for now I think it's clear Hohaia is going to play somewhere. To me his best position has always been fullback and with Gaskell offering a top kicking game you need him in the team.

Gaskell would be the first name i'd have down in the halves simply because of his kicking. I'd play Hohaia fullback or back up hooker or even move Lomax in to fullback before leaving that lad out.

If I was naming the backline i'd least like to face against us at the minute i'd go-

1- Hohaia 2- Makinson 3- Wheeler 4- Meli 5- Foster 6- Gaskell 7- Lomax

To use Gaskell as your bench back would be a sad waste.

Gaskell made a huge difference as soon as he came on tonight and until he did so Saints kicking game was utterly abysmal.

Mixed bag for me.

The kicking game in the first half looked awful, however it must be said that Saints were kicking into a very strong wind.

I thought the pack were out muscled for quite a bit of the match by Widnes, only Perry and Clough showed the ability to make yards in heavy traffic.

Foster was all at sea for large parts of the match in defence. It was comical at times.

The players were not familiar were the touchlines were, and ran into touch on a number of occasions.

Lance is a fast elusive runner, but didnt create anything with the ball in hand. He is the type of player that at times will run up his own backside. Will frighten opposition defences though as teams wont know what he is doing. Problem is this also applies for Saints as well.

When Gaskell came on, the team moved the ball around the field far better. His try was good and the ball he gave for Dixons well taken try was superb

Makinson was outstanding. Started at fullback and was like a rock in defence and dangerous in attack. Excellent break then perfectly timed inside pass for Melis try. Also scored an excellent try.

Lafranchi was pretty anonymous.

Ashe looked dangerous when on the field. He seems to glide across the pitch and beat people without seemingly trying. Could be a breakthrough season for him.

Soliolas big hit. BOOOOOOOM!!!, he then goes and misses a number of tackles that he really should have made.

Wheeler didnt fall apart on contact with the opposition.

We got pinged for crossing a few times in the game which is a sign that the players are still not upto speed with the moves yet.

Defence was as porous as one of the Typhoo tea bags.

Lance Hohaia cannot play at fullback as he cannot catch. He should be the back from the bench who gets 4 minutes at the end of matches. Gaskell's a better player.

How did Widnes fair in this game ?

It will be nice to read an unbiased report..........

They faired very well, although I think they had a few injuries. Hopefully nothing serious. Watt and Flynn were most noticeable. Troublesome players both.

Very, very well. They were the more 'up for it' team and were pretty dominant early in the game. I'd say the Widnes attack was the more creative of the two and the more willing to attack from deep. Widnes scored a couple of really well constructed tries and looked to have a good balance of pace and power in the backline. I like the look of Hanbury and Paddy Flynn took his tries well.

Defensively Widnes' approach was borderline Wigan-esque. It would be a shame if they went down the negative Wigan route and tried to play anti-rugby next season. There were periods of deliberate holding down, attention on standing legs and getting unneccessary numbers into the tackle in order to slow the game down. Being a friendly it worked to a degree, although without the defensive discipline Wigan have it might not be so successful in a SL game. I think Widnes will be pleased with the showing, they won't be flogged every week like some teams have been in SL on that showing and there should be enough there to do quite well at home particularly. They were very creative and were clearly at a more advanced stage of preparation than Saints, who were very rusty. Two tries in 30 seconds towards the end made the score unrepresentative of the game itself IMO.

You have to take into account the fact that there were unlimited interchanges tonight, so there were a lot of changes on both sides at times.