That's what concerns me about the pairing too. With both of those players the defence is never going to expect them to take them on because they are always expecting a pass. That's a great opportunity for them to actually take the line on and catch the defence out but neither really looks interested in doing that.
I didn't think Williams was doing a bad job at stand off considering he was playing behind a poor pack. Last night we actually had two props who were causing problems and so it's no surprise that we got a little more out of Smith, but I can't help but wonder whether we'd also have seen more from Williams.
I still think Hampshire and Williams would compliment Smith better than Powell as both can threaten with ball in hand and trouble defences.

I would have to see it again but I remember thinking that he wasn't square at the time before the penalty was blown. here is the proper wording of the rule you are referring to, which doesn't apply in yesterday's case because there was no dummy half

In their defence both Powell and Smith took the line on last night.

The ref signalled that Faz was not square. The penalty wasn't because he wasn't allowed to dive on the ball.

We won the same fixture last year 56-10.

The team then was Williams and Smith in the halves (no Green), Powell at hooker (swapping with Williams), Tierney at full-back and Jordan James one of the interchange props.

So what is the issue now? The team last night was as good as or even better than in last year's win.

hulls team?

In your comments on the Hull match last year you ask what is the issue now ?,maybe because a certain player played in the No 13 shirt in that match (Lockers).

The statement I have just made disturbs me, if we are so reliant on one player and this is confirmed by a lot of posters on here saying we are missing him, what happens when the time comes when he does not come back ?.
Over the last couple of seasons he has missed a lot of games and then got himself half right for the big games, when even then he sometimes seems half fit.
In the present squad we do not have a player with the depth of skill and the respect of the other players to take that role on when the inevitable comes.(which in my opinion will be sooner rather than later).

But posters keep on saying we will be ok when Lockers comes back.

That is why the present talk about the halfbacks is tied up with the absence of Lockers (which no body knows when it will become permanent) , we played yesterday two halfbacks who could be called steady halfbacks. Which of those would have done what Lockers did last year in the Premiership semi against the Wire when the scores were level ?, in the last minute he took the ball from MM on the last tackle and went blind and swung a long pass on the last tackle for Burgess to go in at the corner.

We have got to have a player who can try to do the unexpected and in the present team we do not have anybody playing in his right full position who can do this.

You really think Hull were the reason we didn't score more on Friday?

I tend to agree.

Think someone (maybe Bilko) posted a stat on here a while ago on our win % with and without Lockers and it is awful reading.

It was me, we're over 10% more likely to lose without him

was it a different to last years team?

The Hull team are strong defensively but poor in attack, and they've been like that for a season or two now. Look at the first half against Leeds or the whole of the Warrington game. They have the ability to frustrate opponents.

Also two other things - firstly the absence of Lockers is a factor. Take the best player out of ANY Super League team and see how they cope (Roby, Chase, Carney, Carney, Clark).

Secondly the pitch was poor and meant that the score was always going to be low. With a smaller, lighter team than most the hard pitches can't come soon enough for us. (Hopefully a prolonged dry spell before Good Friday like last year IIRC!)

OK I may be clutching at straws here but I'm more positive after Friday. I fancy us at Leeds now. From reading their boards they seem to have more than a few problems themselves, it may be a decent time to play them. A win there - and the season is back on track. A loss - and it's no big deal. Still plenty of time to put it right.

Hull are strong defensively? What?! Did you watch their game against Leeds? They missed 47 tackles. They even missed 35 against us yet we still only scored 13 points.

Saints manage to post plenty of points even with their starting half-backs injured. Roby missed the Widnes game and they still scored 5 tries.

Agree on the state of the pitch though, Sarge in particular seemed to struggle with it. And I also believe we will go well against Leeds.

I posted after the Huddersfield game (I think) that it looks like we don't bother practicing any set-plays or even 5th tackle plays anymore. I think we work so much on defence that it is affecting us offensively.

How many times did Green do that sideways kick from deep to Burgess last year and it worked so well? We haven't tried it once this year. We have literally gone back to basics and that is embarrassing for a team that 2 years ago scored nearly 1000 points.

I watched the U-19s game against London this afternoon, and it struck me that Wigan played very much a 'basic' game. With kids, you might have thought they'd be a bit more adventurous in attack, but I'm sure they were playing to orders. Next to no offloads that I recall (except one, that went to the opposition), no kicking early in the tackle count, nothing very surprising at all. All that said, they worked their plays well enough, and ended comfortable winners, but it did make me think about the ethos at the club.

Yes the Hull defence had a mare against Leeds but the first half showed their capability. If you look at the table from last season you will see what I mean. They conceded only 23 more points than Saints over 27 rounds. They were the only team in the bottom half to have a positive points difference because of their relatively strong defence.