I've disputed this robotic tag for years. It was the same at Wigan under Maguire.

When it's done with precision and pace it's fantastic to watch and difficult to defend against.

I was at the Wigan and Souths training session last week and it was good to watch the effort put into getting those "robotic" plays to work. Maguires teams have a great work ethic and it'll only be a matter of time before he gets the NSW and Australia jobs.

Your "go forward" is a function of your handling - not your forward power. It was exactly the same in the Grand Final. You made plenty of yards - but very few through the channel 10m either side of the centre spot.

Guys like Farrell and Bateman are very adept at scything through gaps on the edge of the defence. But when the opposition pattern is sound and it comes down purely to brute force traction (such as clearing your own line in heavy conditions against physical packs) neither is going anywhere.

This is why I don't see Farrell as a genuine GB second row. There are no holes in the Australian edge defence. And he's not big enough to worry them through the middle.

It's precisely the same problem we had when Millward decided he didn't need big props, opting instead to go for mobility.

To be honest, I don't think Swift will play three consecutive years on the wing. Either he'll move inside or he'll leave.

Playing devil's advocate - why should players spend a greater proportion of time practicing kicking when yards are so easy to come by SL?

A side challenging for the title might only play six or eight games a season in which territory is absolutely crucial. Most of the time they can rely on their opponents to hand them the very same opportunities a good kicking game will produce.

But you said Bateman's quick feet got him nowhere and Farrell got neutralised which those stats would suggest is untrue. They made roughly 300 metres worth of forward ground between them regardless of running in a straight line or hitting holes on the edge to gain ground.

Both had top games and both are two of the best backrowers in superleague. Good enough for international level? I think so but even if not they're just about the best we have so we don't have much choice.

Just to play devils advocate you could say that Souths didn't fall for the scoot from dummy half and just defended the "massive" Saints pack with ease. As such Saints didn't have the passing game to get on the outside.

Saints have a big pack, but even they looked small in comparison to the Souths front 6. Amor in particular looked very small.

Interesting to see that Barcelona are smashing City atm. Wonder if people think there is a gulf in class between La Liga and the Premier League?

There is between Barca and Real Madrid compared to the English teams. It's as big as the top NRL clubs verses any of ours.

Only difference is the likes of City, United, Arsenal etc have no excuses unlike the superleague clubs.

2-1 Id hardly 39-0.

Hopefully the new SL format will encourage more teams to compete in more games. Salford apart (showing classic signs of a hastily assembled side) there does seem to be grounds for hope on that score.

I do understand that its human nature for many people to "get by" rather than keep trying to improve, but there are plenty of examples of individual players who clearly put in more work on parts of their game than others. I'd say Graham and Peacock in the forwards, and going back the likes of Edwards (IMO a fairly ordinary player who made himself good through hard work) and Hanley are exactly the sort of attitude we need more of.

As an aside, I think people sometimes underestimate the physicality of the NRL compared to SL. Souths for a couple of years, the Roosters with SBW (particularly 2013) and Manly for a number of years are brutal sides to watch, as well as having speed and skill. Its not just sheer size either. St George have got what many consider to be the weakest pack in ther NRL, but Warrington didn't walk all over them as many sides did last year.

It's impossible to have a great set of forwards AND a great set of backs under the salary cap these days.

And no team has ever won SL without a very good or excellent pack.

This. As I said to a few friends after the game, Super League is the NFL Europe to the NRL's NFL. The NRL is so far advanced that it sets the standard to aim for throughout the game. I think it's safe to say that will probably remain the case for the rest of my life. It's also why I agree with Russell Crowe's opinion that club footy is the way to grow the game. RL has intense rivalries and coupled with a tremendous product on the field, it can sell. The NRL is the flagship of our game and if that grows it will have a knock on effect for us because, entertainment wise, Super League is a five star product comparable with the best of any other sports. As long as it remains entertaining i.e. professional, that will always be the case.