What was with the decision to go for 2 from the half way line? Wakefield are a good side but I felt that was a little negative and I certainly couldn't see Sean Long agreeing to it, the ball would have been in touch before Harry could signal for the 2.

Every time we got a penalty in the second half the players looked round at each other and held their arms out in confusion, what was that about? Were they awaiting a signal from the side that wasn't coming or were they just disagreeing amongst themselves?

I thought that going for the 2 was the right option. If Eastmond had converted it we would have been two scores ahead so wouldn't have been panicking at the end, and we didn't really have much momentum at that point as Wakefield had just scored. Right decision, just poor execution let us down.

we should of dropped a goal and why does it always rain on friday when we play

I noticed every time we got a penalty in there half, we looked to the bench for a decision. Every team does it these days, gone are the days were the captain makes the decisions on the pitch. This is wrong, IMO. When on the pitch, the captain should make the decision as to what the team do, not all stand around and look at the bench hoping they give a signal. At one point, Graham (I think), was waving his hands in the air towards the bench waiting for a decision.

We had 2 or 3 chances to drop a goal, but we kept moving wider and wider with the ball instead of setting up for the 1. This is were Long would have took control and set things up, hopefully Eastmond can do this with experience.

So if that was the right call, why did we not go for 2 with the next one which was 15 metres closer?

Hesitancy after missing the last attempt I'd presume? I thought we should have done then too.

When Eastmond went for the two, beforehand he and Pryce were discussing what to do. Pryce wanted to go for touch but it was Eastmond's decision to have a kick at goal.

Personally, i think it was the wrong call, i can see were he was coming from, going 8 points infront, but at very least he should have got it dead.

It was the right call and Eastmond had the distance. If he'd kicked it the game would have been over.

i suppose hindsight is a wonderful thing, if he kicks it saints lead by 8, and it wouldn't have been discussed on who decided to go for goal

Just give Jammer the captaincy, I'm sure he would have made the right decision, as Scully used to

While on the subject of kicking...

How odd was Arnolds goal kicking yesterday?

His first looked like he shanked it, the next thing it's bending in on a low trajectory.

The difference being, of course, that Longy has been doing the job for donkey's years whereas Kyle is just starting out. He's going to get some calls wrong and some right; he's going to waver in his confidence and judgment. That's what learning is all about. It's a big mistake to try and put an experienced head upon inexperienced shoulders. Kyle needs to make his mistakes in order to learn but he also needs the support of the senior players so that any mistakes he does make will not undermine him.