Get your head out of your ar$e, and actually read some of the posts people are writing.

Like I said, you had several top players missing.

It was a scrappy game between two poor sides, but you came out on top.
When you get the better players back you have to trust in the coaching staff to produce better Rugby. If they still play 5 drives and a kick then you can moan but when you are on the slide and have players missing then surely it is more important to play up the jumper and grind out a win at, lets remember, a side who beat Leeds and Hull the last few weeks.

I agree we had some quality players missing and everyone is hoping they make a massive difference if/when they return.

The main issue is the quality and style of the rugby we are playing. The players are not determining this because I believe we still have enough quality to play better attacking rugby and TBF we show it in small glimpses.

It is probably just a case of giving it time then mate.

If you think the players currently on the field can play better Rugby then I can see why people complain.

However without some key players and with a couple of young inexperienced players in the team, Lee, Maloney, Burnett, Briscoe etc, perhaps Agar is looking at keeping to a simple game plan until the team picks up some confidence and experience together and gradually and more flair to the game?

Saints didnt start playing the way they do over night, it is maybe a long term plan.
Then again it could just be boring RL, only time will tell but at least you are picking up wins and staying well in touch with the play off's.

I don't dismiss anyone's opinion whatsoever but will argue against them on here if I disagree using facts that I know (not fiction) and my opinions of games as I see them.



Less dropped ball always leads to a better performance. Always has done and always will do. We moved the ball wide confidently in the first half. Struggled for field position in second half and lost a fair bit of direction. Had a 2nd half try rightly disallowed.



And also beat us/Leeds/and wire recently.



Thanks for that.



Is that not what you do too or is accusing someone of wearing 'rose tinted spectacles' not being dismissive of their opinion ?

We are average - not very poor in my opinion as our league position shows - middle. As for any other team in the league beating us I failed to see the relevance of such speculation and found it amusing. That together with the somewhat negative view that we won only because the other team were so poor made me laugh. Apologies.

Well above it........and believe it or not......totally non-biased. If we lose, we lose and unless we have given less than at least 99%, then I will maybe whinge....a bit! I know we have our 'hangers-on' but no way near the percentage of the Rovers supposed 'die-hards'. When we win/beat you we dont brag about it for weeks afterwards. Only last Sunday i got a load of crap off a couple off a couple of Rovers-shirted idiots cos I had an FC badge on the polo I was wearing......this was about an hour after your win over Quinns......I asked 'em what sort of car they drove cos they should be entering it into next seasons F1 competition, THEY DIDN'T GET IT!!!!
To sum it up RW, we know just who the fickle support is at the KC......they have certain characteristics!

We havn't turned the corner in the fact that it was a good display, however we had to win, however hard we made it look, and thats what we did. Everyone has blips throughout the course of a season but I think when we lost a couple of games it massively knocked the players confidence, after last season you can kind of understand how a bad run will really effect them.

To finally get over the line after a baron spell will hopefully be a big shot in the arm for us and we need to build on that win now.

Same old e played last night, different day and ohhh 2 points!

You put a "laughing smiley" as a response to someone who doesn't agree with your opinion



So we failed to score in a full 1/2 against the worst defence in SL as I said



Irrelevant. They've also been convincingly beaten a number of times



You're welcome



No

We didnt score other than a penalty in 40 mins of rugby vs Salford with the worst defence and youre disagreeing that we didnt only win because Salford were poor?

We beat them because we were the better side on the day. Isn't that pretty much how every game is won?

We won the game over 80 minutes. I've read about how all 7 of our wins were poor and the opposition were 'underdone' or poor. No doubt Leeds were poor when Salford beat them at home. No chance at all the Salford had something to do with Leeds' performance of course. The point is we were better than them and did enough to win. Defence was good and pretty tough at times and in the second half we survived a serious deficiency of posession by conceding one try only. Any game we can win with so many players out should be applauded. Nowhere will I claim that we are a good side but we are not poor but lack quality, consistency and leadership.