Makinson & Percival walk into the backs, Lomax or Welsby for Myler, Walmsley probably as good as any of those props, Batchelor or Matautia get into that second row and I'd have Knowles definitely over Bridge at 13, though I think it's fair to say Bridge wasn't a 13 anyway.

Percival gets in ahead of Atkins or king? Not a chance!

And Batchelor gets nowhere near that second row.

Close one, but I'd have him ahead of Atkins.

I like Batchelor. Good, solid player. Again, it's close with Grix, who was similarly solid.

That team list is making me dewy eyed simply due to the fact that Ratchford isn’t on it.

Grix was a bit more than solid and was a much more intelligent player than Batchelor. If the second row was Anderson and Westwood which it should’ve been then Matautia isn’t getting a game either.

From some of these comments I suspect that while that 2011 side was indeed a very good one, I think we can be a bit guilty of having a rose-tinted view of some of the individuals that were in that side.

I forgot Saints are the only team to deal with injuries/bans/adversity in general. Spare me! You'd think you beat us with old creepy Eamon at full back and Johnny Vegas in the forwards.

Maybe that team was greater than the sum of its parts.

Does that 2011 team hold the record for the best points difference at the end of a regular super league season? Think it was something like +690! That team was a bit more than 'very good'.

Think it was F 1072 A 401 over 27 games.

We were 12 league points ahead of Leeds who finished 5th.

And yet, they still didn't win either of the big prizes.

Perhaps a case of flat track bullies - they were the Graeme Hick of RL?...

I think I saw somewhere that on a 'points per game' basis we were 3rd behind a Saints team of the mid 2000's and Bradford team of the early 2000's? Something like that, anyway.

What I'd give to see[i any[/i side perform some champagne rugby these days.