A bit like some not giving teams like Rovers credit for finishing so high in the league, I had seen plenty of comments like 'this is the worst standard in SL so far' etc. Not from yourself may I add.

It's also funny how when you give a club some credit, you still get moaned at.

Realistically every result has something to do with the way [iboth[/i sides perform. Hull deserve alot of credit for the win, clearly saints didn't turn up.

You just said even the team at the bottom of SL would've turned Saints over that night. That isn't giving the club credit, is it? That's saying it's the other club's fault that we won.

Saints weren't exactly shocking, were they. They dominated us in the first 20, made plenty of breaks and had plenty of chances. They may not have been at their best, but they put in a lot of effort. They were just beaten by the better side. Even the Sky team, who are usually creaming all over them, gave Hull the credit and recognised Saints just weren't good enough despite the effort.

Welcome to our world.

Saints were poor, but I also said you'd resolved one of your major issues of the last few years and you've every right to be optimistic about success. I also said earlier in the thread that you had a good enough squad on paper to reach the GF.

Bloody 'ell, if that isn't credit from a Rovers fan, I don't know what is.

Oh, and I never mentioned Harlequins

Your right it wasnt by me, i wasnt even talking about Hull, but SL in general when Hull, Rovers or Wakey etc win a game that they wern't expected to, it is always the team not playign well, rather than the team that wins getting the credit.

Just as a matter of interest, HOW were St's poor??? They completed a high percentage of their sets, didn't miss that many tackles and has a decent share of possession?

The down side to there performance was due mainly to lacking ideas (because their main playmaker for the previous 12 seasons was on the opposing side) and lack of size in the pack (something their opposition has hd problems with for the past 2 seasons).

In short, Hull have improved their squad in areas where St Helens have become weak.

St Helens didn't actually play that poorly for the personnel they have, it was just that Hull were far superior on the night.

Good post my friend, bang on the money for mine.