lets face it you won ok..defended well..but the truth is it was 5 tries to 4 and with a so called goal kicker missing six attepts from six..that gave you your win..its a well known fact saints drop to the level of the opposition they are playing and thats why we played e...have a nice day..

who got the points

Hopefully thats true, good news if it is.





And as for the whole "the best team" debate, it seemed to me that throughout the game you were the best team, we can come up with as many excuse as to why we didn't win as we want but the best team on the night won.

And 9-2 on the penalty count = Piggybacks up field.



Can't deny the 5-4 try count but the pratt in the middle didn't give Wakefield a fair crack of the whip(Well his interpretation of the rules).



But come on 'take the rough with the smooth' like we do each season.

Fair enough, and phrased in the manner you do in the first 'sentence' I have no real objection to it. However, the latter of your post, along with some of your fellow Saints fans have made themselves look a mix of bitter, condescending, immature sore losers who lack any kind of grace.

Under the original rules of the game and so for the purists, putting the ball down over the line earned you a [itry[/i at goal and nothing more - it is the kick that earned points.

Don't think we need to justify the win to bitter losers.



We won by playing well. The points scored are all that matter, as Leeds showed us.

it was a cheap shot and should deserve a small ban but let's not go over the top about it.



all those suggesting the ban should be based upon whatever injury James has sustained really should think about what they are saying

It has been suggested that is in the rule book. The extent of the injury will be taken into account and rightly so for a cheap shot like that.





If Stosic had stood up and asked him to do it again his would have fallen out.

If you follow the Saints logic, we won the cup in 1968.

I remember Andy Kelly suggesting this back in our first season in SL I think. Not a bad idea in certain circumstances.

i remember when long got injured for the season (knee ligaments) after an innocuous late challenge from Brandon Costin, people were calling for him to be banned for the season, which is obviously a total over-reaction.



Maybe Willie Mason should be banned for 4 years because Fielden certainly hasn't played since....

We could have used that excuse for most of the season but chose not to. On Friday night you were beaten by a side better than you on the day, why not just accept it and move on and save yourself any embarassment

with poor excuses'. BTW we had Martin, Drew and Blanch out injured I thought that I would let you know seeing as none of our fans want to enlighten you of that fact hth