2 Cracking hits that need to be made legal imo I agree with our Coach they were "face on" and hit other forwards don't see the problem.

The late ones or those that a directly side on and high deserve sending offs and bans but what Singo did imo was put 2 classy big hits in but the powers that be now deem them illegal.

I agree with the theory but as you acknowledge them are deemed illegal so you've got to box clever. I don't want to see bans when very avoidable.

The definition of the shoulder charge seems to have gone from "leading with the point of the shoulder" towards the Union definition of "not using the arms to hit and wrap" as the season has gone on.



The former can be dangerous (for ball carrier and tackler alike) the latter much less so. The balance needs redressing IMO.

Late contact with the shoulder should be illegal - thought it already was before banning shoulder charges.



Contact with the shoulder to the head of the ball carrier should be illegal - thought it already was after Bailey's hit on Fa'asavalu got Graham all riled up.



However with the ball tucked under your arm, dip your shoulder into the defender and hey presto that's fair game.

It's forecast rain tomorrow, who wants to tell the Saints fans?

Nah mate, gonna fair up after lunchtime. Was hoping for rain TBH, think we play those conditions better than most teams.

Meh, we have a kicking game now!

Can you lend us one

Leeds got to be the big favorites for this game. On fire, top of the league. Whats gone wrong? You normally strike from 5th?

Wigan have pinched that one from us.Have you noticed they have stopped saying we were not true champions in 2011 and 12

SLIGHT favourites at best....any claims by Saints fans that we are big favourites won't be taken seriously by anyone, whether Leeds affiliated or not. Merely seen through as an attempt to modestly play down your chances......you win = fantastic unexpected victory, you lose = told you so.

Sounds about right to me.