Just watched the highlights. I thought our defence might have been a bit off conceding 3 tries. Delighted to say not so if the highlights mirror the whole game.

2 from 3 of the Saints tries came off blatant forward passe, no team could defend that.

Doesn’t matter this time but the ref or linesman, vid knows which one is looking for them were poor in that regard. I have to ask where are they looking. Since the game began spotting forward passes has been a pivotal part of the officials job. I accept borderline and don’t even mind a slight bias to the attacking team but this was poor. I know it could be the TV angles and I’ll look again on a bigger screen later so I may ne wrong. I’m

Take the point but the line looked a little passive in conceding all three tries… that said the team have to take massive credit for their ‘next up’ attitude…

Not one of our players reacted to say they were forward. And we still should have stopped them. The last one was awful. And that i assume is why he isn't getting a contract.

Can anyone tell me how Bowes and Shaw went? How far do they look away from possibly being first team ready?

On the highlights Jowitt seemed to be having a hand in everything. There’s not many fullbacks who can join the line better and find a pass. Id honestly stick with Jowitt as he’s entering his best years and will only get better over the next 5-7 years.

Thought all the above played well.
Good to see Sid taking defenders with him after the tackle!


Evans run and pass for Max's try was sublime.....
They looked like they were enjoying themselves out there and tbh I thought we were going to score every time we were in their 20.
Not interested who they had missing - you can only beat the team thats put out in front of you........
Yes, a couple of soft tries, but at the end of the day it didnt make any difference.
We had Lewis Murphy in the team!




He totally outshone Makinson who I actually forgot was playing until he took the kicks...

Looked again, I'll revise it down to one.

Bowes was very good, shaw good. As for Max i thought he was excellent. Dont know how much it will cost to sign Jamie Shaul but if money is tight then I would just stick with Max. We need a top class half , once thats sorted see what we have left and if not enough for two fullbacks, more than happy to go with Max alone.

Completely echo that sentiment. I like Shaul and think he’s played well but Max should be our full backs for the next 5-7 years imho. He will continue to develop and improve marshalling the defence (I have seen glimpses of him directing players in the line). For me full backs don’t hit their peak till 27-33 much like props are generally late bloomers.i would honestly consider having Jowitt as 1 with maybe bringing through an understudy from the academy if possible. If we have Max and Shaul then 1 will be sat in the stands so seems a waste of resources in some respect.

Til one does a knee, then you have none...

Proper competition for a starting spot is essential to get the best out of any player.

Also, Jowitt has the ability to play 6 and offers cover there.

We need a better squad, not just a better 1-17.

MC, in his 'statement' said that we hope to sign Jamie S
(which I interpret as he's signed him

)

Plus a very good goal kicker

Or doesn’t and we have one sat in stands. We just don’t know. Which is why I said we should go for a cover option only promoted through the ranks or even for the odd few games rely on Gaskell for cover (there are options).

Jowitt is a full back and not a 6. He can at a push cover there but will never be a 6. We most certainly need a quality 6 and a some cover at halfback too.

I wouldn’t be dissapointed if Shaul signed as he’s gone well for us but I’d rather see Max continue to grow and he needs regular game time for that.