Eddie and Stevo seemed to imply tonight that the Leeds players decision to dye their hair pink before this match had distracted them in some way from the seriousness of the event.

A valid point or an excuse for their utterly crap performance?

There might be something in it. Leeds looked to be finding a nice run of form but I can'tthelp thinking doing stuff like that shows the players have been distracted.

First rule of having daft hair cuts is.....win the game or at least put up a performance.

If somebody said to me before the season which team would dye their hair 'funny' colours and end up looking like mugs I'd have picked Leeds.

And to think the Whino's fans have a go at our flags....ha.

It's going to be fun when fans from other clubs spot this gem of a thread.

I think it was down to poor preparation from Leeds. There was always going to be a big reaction from Saints tonight as there is anytime a club changes coach. You get that instant lift, yet for what ever reason Leeds didn't see that coming and underestimated Saints.

As for Saints the big test comes once the euphoria of a new coaching team rubs off and the usual weekly grind returns.

I also think that the big test for Wigan will be in two weeks time against Saints,Wigans form during the last few weaks as been just as bad as Saints,even though Wigan have managed to snatch a few points during this period.

Looked like clowns, played like clowns.

That sums it up perfectly. If you dont perform you will get a heap of criticism, particularly when you get stuffed in that manner.

Some strong messages from Jamie Peacoock on twitter tonight.

"To anyone who thinks we lost or were unprofessional due to red/pink hair. You r clueless.
There are far more important things in life than sport results. To raise money for those less well off than ourselves.
If I had the choice. I would do it again. 100%. We were beaten by a great Saints performance.
We as players have a choice. Sulk or man up and put it right next Friday."

"@BenHarris08: @JamiePeacock10 winning isnt everything, winning is the only thing. Your a sportsman not a charity worker so act like one."
"@benharris08 You are sad, sad person. I pity you."

It was a bit gimmicky for sure, but ultimately top sportsmen ought to be more professional than let things like that distract them.

However, there's no doubt that Leeds heads weren't in the right place. Saints were on fire, but that was a complete massacre, not just a defeat.

Perhaps the red hair was a symptom rather than a cause. Indication of a kind of "we're so good that we can do the occasional daft thing and it won't matter" attitude.

The muppets on Sky made a big deal about it. Stevo called them unprofessional and it seems to have touched a nerve.

[urlhttp://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=rleague/12/03/25/RUGBYL_St_Helens_Quotes.html&BID=480[/url

There are other ways to raise money for charity (e.g. everyone throw in £10 into a kitty for each try we score) without running the risk of getting slaughtered and looking like a bunch of complete bells.

Still, that boat has sailed now

The muppets on Sky made a big deal about it. Stevo called them unprofessional and it seems to have touched a nerve.

[urlhttp://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=rleague/12/03/25/RUGBYL_St_Helens_Quotes.html&BID=480[/url

There are other ways to raise money for charity (e.g. everyone throw in £10 into a kitty for each try we score) without running the risk of getting slaughtered and looking like a bunch of complete bells.

Still, that boat has sailed now

It doesn't surprise me that McDermott and Peacock are both concentrating on what a worthy cause it was. It was indeed a worthy cause, but the criticism is not about the cause, it's about the very poor performance and whether putting fancy dress on indicated that they thought it would be a walk in the park.

Of course, they'll deny that until the cows come home and no-one will ever be able to prove any different. But I'll bet they now wish that just one of them had put his hand up and said: "Hang on, suppose we lose?"

Jamie Foster runs about with a daft haircut every week, I don't see why it should distract them. Leeds were quite simply second best by far on the night and were soundly beaten by a Saints side with fire in their belly.

Daft hairdo's has never stopped the Aussies handing us our ar5es for 39 years has it

Seems to me like a load of nonsense from a typical Stevo rant begging for the flatcap, whippet and a pint of mild days.

Stevo seemed to think Leeds were going to steam roller Saints (and tipped them to) from the beginning and seemed to spend the next 30 minutes trying to justify why that wasn't happening, without acknowledging the fact that Saints were simply running hot for the first 25 minutes and blew them away.

It could have been worse . We could have lost to Widnes

The team we put out at Widnes would've beat your men tonight

Sorry, but all things considered, no, it could not have been worse.

I think that Peacock and McDermott are - to paraphrase - protesting too much. The team was off its game from the off, Sts were up for it. If Leeds had been genuinely up for that game - e.g. like they were for the Manly game - they would have only lost by a fraction, if at all.

I blame the "Rugby Gods"

The only response to this is the proverbial, "and if pigs had wings ..."

There was a gulf between those two teams last night that left me totally gobsmacked.

Whatever it was, I think it would have taken a bit more than Leeds "being up for it" to have reversed that result in any meaningful way.

Leeds were certainly very poor , but could it be that Saints wanted to play for their new coach after getting rid of RS who they did not want to play for ./

Exactly what I said last night.

Saints were obviously going to be fired up last night and seeing the Rhinos would have only added fuel to that fire. There are hundreds of ways to generate money for charity that do not wind up the opposition .