That made me chuckle
I could have come on with 10 mins to go and we’d still have won

Lovely from Sterlo https://twitter.com/SkySportsRL/status/ ... 04896?s=19

Lovely from Sterlo https://twitter.com/SkySportsRL/status/ ... 04896?s=19

First off that was a really enjoyable game of rugby, and had the ellis penalty gone over then it might have been a different result.
A lot on here are saying it was an average display from Hull, personally I thought it wasnt massively different to the Leeds display just that you played a team with a better game plan. Leeds were beyond dire last week, and fair play to Hull they did a job but that was about it.
Looking at the starting line ups that should've been a cricket score, for we're relegation favourites, and missing our intended front row of Garbutt, Masoe, Parcell, our captain Hauraki and Abdull all who wouldve been in the 17 and playing a team tipped for honours missing only Mau and Faurimo from the starting 17 (not including Kelly or Ellis as are they starting 17?) then I think it shows the difference a quality coach makes. .

That game wont define our season or yours, certainly made for a good nights entertainment though

You say we are dire, drab and predictable in other channels.

In the end derbies are no barometer of anything playingwise, just a battle of nerves and appetite. And one we one, thankfully.

A fair and balanced post in my opinion.
The difference in the game plans was plain to see.
Expansive rugby from Rovers and a typical drive up the middle performance from us.
Radford said his game plan was to take Rovers on through the middle. Hudgell on RH said they expected that from us with the given inside ball.
Result aside I know which team was the more entertaining to watch and fair play to Rovers for giving it a go.
Squad wise we are miles apart in quality but Rovers game play and enthusiasm made it a closer game than it should have been.

I thought he was really good against Leeds on Sunday and was class again last night. Impressive start to the season.
Looks like he's adamant in defending his, Supporters player of the year, Players player of the year, and Coaching staff's player of the year trophies.




It was bonaire but that's maybe because it'd be less embarrassing as he said he wasn't good enough to ever make it as a Super League centre

Does anybody know if programmes are available to buy post game? Forgot to pick one up.

Some good individual performances and good that we stuck in there when it would have been easy to fall away but rovers are clearly better coached and were more energetic and enthusiastic on the night.

Our squad balance is wrong. We lose a couple of forwards and we end up playing fonua off the bench for 10 minutes and houghton at 13. We were looking for another prop when fonua became available and he shouldn't have been signed IMO. A big forward would have added more to the squad. We have plenty of options in the outside backs but when everyone is fit the forwards pick themselves. I can see radford tinkering with the team on a regular basis just to give players game time

We need to be a lot better next week or we will get mullered. Give saints that amount of ball in our 20 and they'll be running in tries at will

Let's get one thing straight the quality in coaching has no bearing on that result, if it did you could argue Hull are better defensively, more clinical and patient. Hardly a surprise how Rovers played was the only choice they had and with us coming off a shorter turnaround it was always going to level the game out. Period.

Great effort from Rovers you probably deserved it to the naked eye but I stick by what I said other then swinging it from left to right very little in line breaks and actual opportunities created. Got lucky with the first try but that's Rugby.

Hardly the benchmark of the season for either team or reflects a coaches ability.

I barely remember any cross field kicks from us last night and the same against leeds. rovers, on the other hand, were peppering our wingers with high balls all night.

It's all a matter of opinions but on paper that was a cricket score in the waiting. The fact we made few line breaks was more down to the quality of our half backs and the playing staff available.
This year will probably tell for hull if radford is good enough, with saints under a new coach and picking up injuries and the squad Pearson has put together anything other than top 4 will be failure

I agree with JTP previous opening paragraph.
Rovers played a more expansive attacking brand of rugby.
We played as we usually do, percentage, low risk rugby driven up the middle.
It was the quality of the squads that made the difference last night, not the coaching ability of which Tony Smith is streets ahead of Lee currently with experience at big clubs, winning trophies and coaching the national team.

We have the ability to play expansive rugby and when we do it's good to watch but play the power game predominantly instead.
I don't think we gave our wingers any clear cut chances last night.

Ok, so if we shipped the ball about like Harlem globetrotters (whilst actually not creating any chances) do you think we would have had the fitness in the last 20 to see the game out after such a short turnaround.

We didn't dominate as much as we would like but thought in the end Radford got it right, made sure we had it defensively and had the ability to turn our field position into points.

Smith is a great coach but he can't teach teams to defend, I think when he won the WCC he conceded 32 points. So to say he is streets ahead is way off the mark. We are 2 from 2 and looking great defensively at the moment and Radford deserves credit for that.