Your original quote did not mention 8 weeks.

"Yep, Barba woke up half way through the match, saw a team that were running on empty and decided to give a cameo performance, he IS the Messiah.
Ps did he use to bunk off tackling lessons?"

Anyway even his coach accepts his performance was below par form round 16 for 10 rounds and said so in the post match interview.

I think in the Warrington game he had more effect when the opposition tired. Not sure this is a cameo or not or whether he was holding himself back.

We can compare to Ratchford however who had no effect at anytime of the match (or was holding it back like Barba)

I’m not sure that you actually disagree with anything I said. I’m not aware that anyone said Ratchford played a blinder on Saturday, but given the disruption to our team perhaps not surprising.
Finally can the defensive role of a full back really be totally ignored in the modern game?

I think we do agree. But I think a lot of the judgements of Barba are coloured by jealousy/sour grapes by some.

Can the defensive ability be overlooked? Well Barba plays full back for Saints and they finished top of the tree in the league, favourites for GF and the second meanest defence in the league at 408 against in 29 games (14 points per game). So his defensive frailties seem to have had no detriment to them.

I think the Saints lack of points against says more about the lack of a cutting edge in the other teams. Look at the half back combinations in the top 4, us (nuff said) Wigan Powell and thingy, you know ther homegrown marquee, and Cas have been missing Gale.
I’m still not giving up on the semi final though!

Barba this afternoon found another Wire player Ratchford in his pocket must have been when he tackled and dumped him into touch.

Marquee turnstile in tackle shock!

I understand, but that Saints defence is also 130 points better than ours against the same teams.

Disagree.
You're playing the stat cards yet again.

This is bonkers. St Helens have obviously been better than us over the 29 games so far and have beaten us three times. But I wouldn't be surprised if we win next week.

When you accuse me of "playing the stat cards yet again" do you mean to say "using facts to back up my argument" ?

Your points not argument.

I would simply enjoy to read your opinion and respond than see you try to make a fact from stats as to make it from it that only your post matters.
I make plenty errors in my posts and points few might agree with...but I won't dwell into stats to make it final as if to go "there you are'.
However I was a little harsh over my stats again remark and I withdraw it. Apologies.

Wires71,the points against figure could just as easily reflect the lack of a cutting edge in attack by the opposition (my earlier point). I cant help but feel that with a bit more fluency in the final 10 we would be in with a cracking chance. I have to admit though that our attack has looked "clunky" to say the least!

Fair enough. Yes if we looked like we had a single clue in the opposition 30 other than a high kick I would be more confident. Some teams have well drilled moves but we don't see to have them. Maybe we are still playing what we see.

Why will I? I've not even seen the tackle and I'm not in the slightest bit bothered that Lineham will be playing in the semi.

If you want the full truth I'm not all that bothered if we win the semi, as I've got zero confidence in our ability to beat Wigan in the final and I'm skint anyway.

No probs. I was not commenting on our chances of beating Saints and using the defence figures. Just that CH asked if the modern full back can be a bit suspect defensively nowadays and I suggested that Saints would argue it has not affected them due to their points against column. I was basing this on the fact that a team with the 2nd lowest points against could be fairly happy with their defence. Nothing more.