There seems to be a lot of understandable anguish on this board. But it was extremely close. As a Leeds fan I thought our disputed try was offside but then again I thought Eastmond's was a knock-on. What I do see from the outside is a club that seems to not be clicking as they once were. If this is your worst year most clubs would take it and be pretty pleased about it.

Saints have had the backbone players of Long, Cunningham, Wellens and Sculthorpe throughout the successful era with equally good supporting players like Martyn, Joynt, Newlove, Albert, Lyon etc. Those good supporting players have been replaced with Wilkin, Pryce, Gidley etc but there haven't been any replacements to the backbone players and that is why when KFC retires that will be it for you men.

Flannery/Clough has replaced Sculthorpe

Eastmond to replace Long (Decent player but has he the character to deal with the pressure of organising/playmaker for a full season?)

Roby/Moore to replace KFC- Both decent players but not the same league as KFC in his prime.

Lomax to replace Wellens - Half decent player he could be a cracker in a few years along with Wheeler but not ready yet.

As with Wigan when we lost backbone players like Farrell, Radlinski, Newton, O'Connor etc we didn't replace them but now are bringing them through in O'Loughlin and Tomkins.

Face facts, a few barron years await for Saints fans I'm afraid.........oh wait no I'm not.

The last two seasons have seen the same prophecies.

The fact is the club needs to think carefully about the direction it's going in, and some decisions need to be made on players who have become fixtures at the club (Gardner, for example: as much as I admire his earnest approach, he is no longer improving and offers nothing beyond tidy close range finishing. Despite this he's taking up an international's wage on our SC).

That said, we are hardly in dire straits. We'll be stronger next year with an actual front row, and with Eastmond providing a lot more zip from first receiver (say what you like about how we'll miss Long ... he's been either injured or rubbish for most of this season). Add to that some power out wide with Soliola and hopefully Puletua out in the second row where he belongs.

The question is whether the likes of Wigan will grow some balls and actually provide a genuine challenge to Saints and Leeds rather than toughing it out with the likes of Wakefield and waxing lyrical about their reserve teams.

Transition period. Phase out the old gaurd and bring in the new. Only thing that would have me worried if I were you is if the club decided to go skinny on the funding for the rebuilding part (like bradford have done) and expect to stay good on reputation.

Long is passed it. Eastmond is a much better replacement.
You need a left centre and Gidley only has a season or 2 left.
Meli is a liability.
Pryce will never lead from the front but brings alot to the party in a on form well run team.
Few aged pack members. You need 2 signings to help out graham.

Potter is just the man for the job imo.

I'd agree with most of that ... except we have a left centre in Soliola, and having brought Fozzard back (hopefully as 4th choice prop), one more front rower would do it.

The last two years we've supposed to be in decline/transition and yet we've managed to make consecutive Grand Finals on the back of them. We now have an opportunity to give ourselves some more zip in the middle of the field with Eastmond playing at seven. He might not be the great organiser yet but if Rob Burrow (who has a weaker passing, creativity, intelligence and kicking game than Eastmond already) can be a key player for Super League winning side then Eastmond certainly can.

We will be a touch stronger next year with our youngsters getting another year under their belt. The test will be how much stronger other teams will be e.g. Giants, Wigoon, Rovers, Wire.

In all seriousness I think it is too early for anybody to start talking about the decline of St. Helens or the resurgence of Wigan.

The points most have made in this thread are valid ones. St. Helens have got an ageing squad and have lost key players in recent years (Sculthorpe, Anderson, Long, Gilmour) who will be hard to replace. Wigan do have reason to be gleeful at the moment as well with a new, well respected and promising young coach joining us from Melbourne and some talented young players like Joe Mellor and Ben Davies in the reserves vying for a first team berth.

Nothing is quite as black and white as it looks on paper however. Although Wigan's youth setup is strong our main competitor this season was the Saints who beat our youngsters in the league earlier in the season so there is promise for St. Helens as well as Wigan.

The structure & management of a club also need to be looked at in order to see how well a club will 'evolve' during a period of transition. Mick Potter has been criticised at St. Helens so far but has previously done well with Catalan & led St. Helens to a Grand Final this season with a less formidable squad than during the Anderson era. Wigan in the past have always had problems in promoting the right youth and their over-dependence on antipodeans who have never performed. Hopefully with Maguire in charge Wigan can sign quality and give more youth a chance.

The final point is the youngsters themselves. Wigan talk up their academy players but it doesn't mean they will be successful - for every Sam Tomkins there is a Thomas Coyle. It is quite possible that with maturity the Saints youngsters can supersede certain Wigan players who are currently better than they are -- and vice versa.

It will be an interesting couple of years for both clubs and, all trolling aside, it could be very fruitful for both sides in years to come.

Not all that sure the coach gets much say at wigan tbh. They seem to get bought this aussie and that aussie by upper management and be expected to get the best out of them.

I'd say Hudds and Wire will be more of a threat to the top ranks next year than Wigan.

According to Mr. Lenagan this is no longer an issue at the Wigan club. The reason we have not signed players for next season other than salary cap constraints is because the issue of who would be coach meant players couldn't be brought in.

There is an element of upper management support for certain players, Mr. Lenagan himself stated that some players Wigan were interested in was dismissed when consulting Maguire. I think Wigan is more of a joint venture in terms of signing players nowadays than in the Lindsay period.

It's strange how peoples views differ. I was at the Wigan shareholders meeting and one of shareholders asked Ian Lenegan if we should go back to the old way where the board signed the players and the coach coached them?

Lenegan said that was not his way as he believed it was the coaches job to "identify" the players and his job to sign them if a) they were available and b) Wigan could fit them under the salary cap structure.

That's the only way to operate. The coach has to have some input into the personnel being signed otherwise you end up with a Shevchenko-Mourinho/Chelski situation.

im an outsider with no points to score.ive been a hull fc since the mid sixties and seen a lot of ups and downs.it makes me laugh when people talk on here of a st helens decline.in all the 45 years ive been watching rl,i would say i have never known st helens to have a poor side.all the teams you care to mention,warrington,wigan,bradford,leeds,hull fc ,etc,etc have all had the bad times ,but i cannot recall saints ever been out of the top 4 clubs in the last 40 years.

Thanks for your post ditchley. We love you!