I thought the ruck was a shambles for both sides tbh.

Silverwood is known for being lenient at the ruck and I think teams know that.

All them pens you conceded was when we were on your line and you were trying your best to slow us right down. About the only time he managed the ruck well.

Even Eddie and Stevo " and that's a penalty. ..he's not give it, Saints were lucky there"

Words to that affect he must have said 5 times in the game.

People are only just noticing this? I've seen him doing it all year, he let's us get away with murder for the first 20 minutes and then does a complete 180 and gives every tiny little thing as a penalty. And then again the same in the second half, I don't know why he does it but I've gotten used to it somewhat lately, what a ball bag he is.

All that possession and you still got beat. You must be gutted.

Silverwood was poor last night. Not as awful as some on here are suggesting, but, poor. Had Evans' try been correctly scored, and then the subsequent Waterhouse try would have made the game 28-0, and virtually "dead in the water)" as a spectacle. (imo) He had been told down the earpeice, or been given a signal from the stands, to make the game more of a contest, so, he gave Stains more or less anything he could get away with, whilst turning a blind eye to any Stains indescressions (sp).

FFS, we are a sport. If we go 28-0 up because we've took our chances, that's "tough tit" to Stains. They shouldn't be allowed a foot in the door because somebody thinks the Sky watching public might turn off (because this game is becoming a foregone conclusion), and watch the footy. That was an important game, which still has a major impact on where the LLS is going. Silverwood's (and other's) decisions tried to change that. Very disappointing.

Well done to Stains on making it a tough match for the remaining 50odd minutes. We showed some fantastic resilience in that second half, and, much to the Sky team's chagrin (from what I was listening to) we got the two points.

For those who went to the game, but have Sky+d it, listen to Mr Clarke's summing up. He sounded like he'd just been told that someone has shot his dog. I've never heard someone's expression (over what was a good spectacle) to be so flat. Maybe it's because his beloved Wigan had just been beaten, and (bar last week's drab final between two poor teams) their season is shuddering to a halt, as they've run out of steam.

The inconsistency was staggering in the second half. Saints were lying all over the ptb when at times we only had to give the tackled player a second lool to be penalised by Silverwood. Still, you had to give credit to Saints: they'd clearly choreographed Hohaia flapping his wings as Willie Manu laughed simultaneously. Seemed to work.

A number of high shots completely ignored too, while we were pinged for ours on them.

I'm still not sure if it's Sky in the earpiece or simply human nature (are refs human?) but decisions going the way of the losing team has been a feature of SL games, and noticeably at televised games, for years.

I am convinced that referees apply punitive interpretation when awarding penalties, and Silverwood is pretty good at doing it. No matter how high/late a tackle is or blatantly offside defenders are, if it's the 1st and the ball is retained, refs look like they've turned a blind eye to the offence - but then they'll wait until later in the tackle count (usually 4th/5th) and award a penalty for something totally innocuous like delaying the play/interference ....... seems to be their way of maximising the penalty by allowing the team with ball in hand to get further down the pitch before awarding it .... and I don't mind that - usually gets the crowd fired right up as they think they're being badly done to at the initial offence. The only problem Wire have is in games like the SF against Hull or the debacle last game against Widnes, when we can't keep hold of the ball long enough to get to the 4th tackle!

Not much in the penalty count after all the drama on here about.

Penalties:
Saints: 8
Wolves: 6

Smith's comments afterwards in the sky interview were interesting. He was saying that they haven't got a clue how the rucks are being refereed at the moment

The standard of reffing in Super League on the whole is shocking and last night was no exception,whilst the penalty count was quite close where the penalties were awarded was heavily in the favour of Saints,repeat sets on our 25 whereas they get pinged when we are on our own 10.
Sides now play right up to and beyond the laws of the game to exploit the weak reffing standards much to the detriment of the spectator,having watched it back on some of our ptbs the Saints line was literally 5 yards away.
Does anyone know what those 2 chaps running up and down the line actually do?
As much as I dislike Union their refs always seem fair and in control of the game and have a good understanding of the rules they are policing,i cannot think of 1 ref in league where you think,this should be a good game so and so's in charge.

On come on Tache, the Union refs ponce about like public school teachers with ridiculous infantile managing of the scrums which end up tasking ages. They haven't a clue what is happening in the mass pile of bodies and just ref by numbers.
Agree about the touchies, what a waste of time they are

Incidentally, and just for a bit of balance, I think last night is the first time in 20 years of watcging Warrington that I've seen us awarded a penalty on the last. Coudln't believe it.

Plus Saints pens seemed to be awarded within 20 metres of our line whereas we got pens on our own 30 metre line.

When Briers was penalised for a gnats nut hair touch on Lomax's foot at the ptb is when I thought he was trying to help them out.

Plus One.

Also what did Bridgey get drawn in with Meli which resulted in a Pen to them (on the 5th tackle) which then resulted in their try to make it 22 - 6. Bridgey just seemed to be prepared to concede a Penalty so he could have a bit of hand bags with Meli. Really daft from such a class player.