no its not as the jobs done by game day

What on earth are you talking about? NK said Saints haven't ever been missing 5, I have just proved we have. Again, what are you on about?

I absolutely will admit I was wrong-

Saints have had only one game in 4 and a bit seasons were they were missing 5 first team players (I’m even willing to admit they were rested).

One game


Let that sink in people



Now let’s go back to the whole point Saints fans don’t like being brought up-they have been very fortunate with injuries and have never had a sustained injury crisis, which every other club has had to deal with in those 4 and a bit years.

So what we have established is
1) that if saints didn’t look after players as well as they do or develop young players as well as they do, they might not be as good as they are.
2) that second string players tend to be less talented than first choice players
3) that Wigan have more average players so losing them probably makes less difference to them than saints losing world class players like Walmsley
4) that if saints had loads of injuries to all their key players Wigan would have a chance at competing with them.

Enlightening stuff.

30 seconds

You found one example and one you made up and they were 14 months apart!

And we know you’ve been looking for more.

And all this from a man who is happy to just keep watching Saints winning games and trophies You’ve no reason to let this get to you.

You’ve hurt me saying I used to be a good poster old boy, saying that at least I used to be one I guess.

Just a leveller here for you mate. Roby won Man Of Steel as an interchange hooker. Can we not say he was a good hooker then either?

Erm, he was playing hooker mate and did 20 about 25 times that year, so yes, of course you can say he was a good hooker.

Besides, I never said Cust can't play 9. If you read it, I said you can't dismiss Hopoate as a 1 despite playing nearly 100 times there if it's OK to count Cust as a 9 after playing there 12 times (assuming every time he came off the bench it was at 9). I was asking NK to be consistent with how he is classing who is a natural fit in each position.

Come on giraffe, you've given one example of a game that you lost, (sort of proves the point) and one when you needed to add your 906th choice player in that position to make five. Thought you were better than that.

It's obvious we are talking about an injury crisis and a prolonged period of games whwre you're missing players from your first choice 17 not some lad who might get a game if you rest a few, which clearly hasn't happened for you. As FTV says, that comes down in large parts to your conditioning staff who should be massively applauded for the work they've done and are a major reason why you are where you are as Bitcon and co were for us in 2010.

Hold on, NK said it is a fact Saints have never been missing 5 players. I proved we have.

If he had said it's a fact we have never been missing 6 players for 8 weeks running I would have agreed. But he didn't. That's not my problem mate, I can't read his mind.

So you trawled through 14 months of Saints fixtures in 30 seconds? (Plus clearly you’ve looked through 4 years worth)

I’m sat chuckling (like a drunk old man) at you sat with a pen and paper trawling Saints fixture lists for missing players

Let’s try and go back to the actual point again-‘Saints haven’t had to deal with an injury crisis like every other club has had to in the last 4 and a bit years’ and all you’ve done is proven the point to be 100% correct.

Not much more to say really.

You’re holding on to that point like a life raft. You haven’t been the only Saints fan on here and the whole debate (that was going ok for a while…funny that) has been to discuss Saints lack of an injury crisis/major injury problems.

You’ve proven peoples point, so thank you. It isn’t all about you or my one line.

He said it AFTER saying many times "for a sustained period" or similar. The fact that you're effectively quoting him out of context to "prove" a point that simply isn't true is quite pathetic mate. It's schoolboy level debate.

Let's clear this up once and for all:

1) Have Saints had multiple players (5+) out FOR A SUSTAINED PERIOD and if so when?

2) When you have fielded these weakened teams have you usually lost?