Nine talking points from NRL Round 10

Scott Pryde Roar Guru

By Scott Pryde, Scott Pryde is a Roar Guru & Live Blogger

Tagged:
 , ,

77 Have your say

    It’s crazy to think we are ten rounds into the NRL season. Ten whole rounds. That’s 80 games of footy. Origin is around the corner, the ladder is tight and we are still no closer to working out who will make and miss the eight after the highest scoring round this season. Here are The Roar‘s NRL Talking Points from Round 10.

    The Knights have their second, but what to make of the Raiders?
    We all knew it was coming, it’s just that no one was sure when the Knights would pick up their second win. As it turns out, two wins in ten weeks is a whole lot better than one in 26 last year, and the hapless Canberra Raiders were on the end of it.

    While the celebrations will run hot for the youthful Knights outfit, this is a Canberra outfit who have more questions than answers about a season that currently appears to be lying in tatters.

    They have won just four of ten games, and have never looked like the convincing, dominant force that they did last year and most expected them to be this year.

    What’s particularly baffling about the Raiders is that they have enough talent to be sitting up the top of the ladder. They proved that last year, but their attack simply hasn’t hit it’s potential and their defence has, for much of the season not been good.

    While their defensive record is far from the worst, it’s not in the top eight and equates to their ladder position for a team who seem to be hanging everything on some ‘Leipana’ magic.

    This is a season quickly slipping away and if Ricky Stuart can’t turn his men around in the next few weeks, it’s a season gone.

    Jack Stockwell Newcastle Knights NRL Rugby League 2017
    (AAP Image/Darren Pateman)

    A super, super Saturday
    There are six clubs who need to take a bow. What a superb six hours of footy it was on Saturday. No one really deserved to lose based on the show that was put on.

    First up it was out to Penrith. A desperate Panthers outfit battled their way through the first half, down 28-6 before pulling off a miraculous comeback 30 unanswered points in the second half to record their second biggest ever comeback.

    If that wasn’t good enough for you, the second game was the match of the weekend, and is an early contender for match of the year – it’s hard to see it being beaten, even by the Cowboys and Broncos rivalry that has shaped the last few seasons when you think of the best matches.

    The Storm should have beaten the Titans. They scored 36 points. When Melbourne score more than 20 points, they normally don’t lose. But they did and wasn’t it incredible.

    Melbourne equalled the highest ever losing score in the history of Australian Rugby League, as the Titans came back once, then came back twice before scoring two tries in the final six minutes to pick up victory in a game that saw 13 tries.

    With Suncorp Stadium building towards capacity, the Broncos then came out to finish a big double-header in the Queensland capital against the Manly Sea Eagles.

    The Sea Eagles blew them off the park in the first ten minutes, scoring 14 points. They then didn’t score again as Brisbane got into the contest and scored 24 unanswered.

    Bryce Cartwright of the Panthers, (centre), celebrates with team mates
    (AAP Image/Dan Himbrechts)

    Forward passes and tackles in the air. What to make of officials and rules?
    Unfortunately, referees are a necessary talking point this weekend. Full credit to the men in the middle, because they made a superb start to the year, but standards have dropped off in the last couple of weeks, hence them appearing here again.

    Forward passes were the topic of discussion this weekend, with two outrageous, blatant ones that should have been pulled back every single time.

    The first of the two being referred to was in the Dragons versus Sharks game on Friday, with Cronulla’s comeback being launched on the back of one that sailed a couple of metres forward.

    It was then onto the Sea Eagles game, with a try in the corner to Jorge Taufua coming off a pass from Tom Trbojevic that went even further forward.

    Tackling in the air was the other hot topic over the weekend, with Tom Trbojevic suffering a potentially serious injury as he was taken out after the ball bounced.

    It’s important to note the ball had bounced, so Trbojevic being tackled in the air wasn’t really a refereeing blunder, more a rule that needs urgent attention.

    It’s something the NRL must look at. If we are concerned about the health of our best players, the simple fact of life is that being tackled in the air is not something that should be allowed after a kick under any circumstance.

    Tom Trbojevic Manly Sea Eagles NRL Rugby League tall
    (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

    Three in a row for the Titans and at full strength, they could go the distance
    Don’t let the header mislead you. I’m not suggesting the Titans are favourites, or that I reckon they will win the premiership. What I am suggesting though, is that September is a weird beast.

    Make the top eight and who knows what’s going to happen.

    The Titans will make the eight. Let’s get that off the bat straight away. This is a team who have been decimated by injuries and bad luck, yet have still found a way to win three on the trot after losing six of their first seven.

    They are yet to play a poor game and while there are still some concerns about the defence of the Gold Coast, this is a team who have plenty of improvement in them, even after scoring 38 points against Melbourne.

    Neil Henry’s men beat reigning premiers the Sharks only a handful of weeks ago away from home and as long as they continue fighting and playing to their strengths, they will make it to September comfortably.

    Once that happens – who knows. The finals are a crazy beast and a team like the Titans could just do something special.

    Titans rugby league player Ashley Taylor running with ball
    (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

    What are the Bulldogs playing at?
    Des Hasler, Moses Mbye and Michael Lichaa. Meet Matt Frawley. You know, that bloke who has given you a spark in the halves this year that no one else has been able to.

    Watching Friday’s loss to the Cowboys, it would have been enough to bring a Bulldogs’ fan to tears as their fifth tackle options went from ordinary, to woeful and then downright disgraceful.

    Frawley was virtually ignored throughout the game, although that seemed to change when it was all too late. Instead, Moses Mbye racked up countless poor options, kicking the ball dead, then refusing to kick it at all, throwing ordinary passes and generally stunting the Bulldogs attack.

    The return of Josh Reynolds might help down the track, but Frawley is their form half, Mbye is not and Des Hasler needs to reform their attack in a hurry.

    Canterbury Bulldogs NRL coach, Des Hasler,
    (AAP Image/Paul Miller)

    Cronulla are playing well below their best, but still at the top
    The Sharks are running second on the ladder and haven’t yet played consistently. They have had good moments, played well when they needed to and got the better of Melbourne with a complete performance, but they appear to be a team down on motivation to clean up their competition like they did last year.

    This is a team who can go back-to-back. You don’t run second after ten rounds without playing good footy, but the Sharks still have a number of gears to go up yet before they are anywhere near their potential.

    That’s fine as well – you don’t want to be peaking at this point in the season.

    But the Sharks do need to show us they can consistently go up the gears in the next month. It’s going to be a telling point of the season as to whether they can fire up.

    This is a team who has the competition at their fingertips, but they are yet to prove come September they will be able to skip away from sides as they did in 2016.

    Paul Gallen Cronulla Sharks NRL Rugby League 2017
    (AAP Image/Craig Golding)

    The Dragons are the real deal
    Okay, I know what you’re thinking – the Dragons lost to the Sharks on the weekend.

    But, this is a team who were tipped by most pundits to finish 15th or 16th on the ladder. They then took it to the Sharks without Gareth Widdop or Josh Dugan, after almost losing to the Roosters in golden point.

    Take out the first 25 minutes against the Melbourne Storm in Round 9 when they fell behind 22-0 in rapid time and the Dragons are yet to put in a really poor stretch of play in 2017.

    This is a team who are building their game off defence and offloads, attacking off the back of being solid on their own goalline and having a ball doing it.

    Every interview seems to be a positive one and it seems that nothing can knock the Dragons down a level. If they can continue that and ride the bumps while Dugan and Widdop are on the sideline, there is no reason they can’t finish in the top four.

    Tariq Sims St George Illawarra Dragons NRL Rugby League 2016
    (AAP Image/Craig Golding)

    The Roosters finally get back on the front foot
    Not through a lack of motivation, the Roosters have been somewhat like the Sharks this year. Playing well enough to sit at the top of the table, but struggling to be dominant and win games by big margins.

    While the Eels were defensively incompetent, it was an important statement game for the Roosters, who ran up 28 first half points. It was something they had to do, no questions asked.

    After winning and losing their last two games by a point each way and having some other unconvincing performances, this was one where Mitchell Pearce and Luke Keary put an authoritative foot down which said ‘the Roosters are a force to be reckoned with.’

    And they absolutely are. This is a team with potential all over the park, and while they won’t win by 40 every wee, the level of intent must remain the same.

    Roosters player Latrell Mitchell is congratulated by Mitchell Pearce
    (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

    Penrith finally win, but they need to build off it
    Well, the Panthers won something. It wasn’t pretty after being down 28 points to 6 at halftime against the Warriors, but it typical Warrior fashion it was a collapse of epic proportions as the Panthers ran up 30 consecutive points to win.

    For Penrith, they need to focus on the positives out of the game and move forward with them. For the first time in what must seem like forever, their attack fired. It might have been against the Warriors, but this is a team who have been struggling big time so to see them put points on, especially after a dreadful first half almost came as a surprise.

    We all know the Panthers can turn it on. They showed us last year, and again in the second half against the Warriors. Concerns about their defence are still relevant and must be addressed, but if they are going to start climbing up the ladder, they have to play something like the team who knocked the Warriors over.

    Roarers, what did you make of Round 10? Drop a comment and let us know.

    Scott Pryde
    Scott Pryde

    One of the mainstays of The Roar, Scott Pryde has written over 1,800 articles covering everything from rugby league to basketball, from tennis to cricket. You can follow him on Twitter @sk_pryde.

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (77)

    • May 14th 2017 @ 6:39pm
      AJL. said | May 14th 2017 @ 6:39pm | ! Report

      Today was the equivalent of watching the Raiders take a collective Julian O’Neill on the jersey. The last month hasn’t been about a lack of talent, or fatigue, or injuries. It’s about a group who aren’t willing to put the work in losing to teams they are capable of beating comfortably.
      At the moment, the Raiders are on track for bottom 4. And I’m at the end of my tether.

    • May 14th 2017 @ 7:03pm
      Geoff from Bruce Stadium said | May 14th 2017 @ 7:03pm | ! Report

      Spot on about about the Raiders Scott – what on earth is going on? They have the talent but don’t appear to be prepared to put in the effort required to win. They knew that the Knights were going to come out hard and give it to them but they couldn’t match their intensity. As a supporter I’m fed up.

      All that promise at the start of the season has evaporated. How the bookies had them as 3rd favourite for the premiership is bewildering.

      The Raiders have dug a huge hole for themselves which is going to be difficult to crawl out of. One upside is they have been playing so poorly very few will be in origin contention. Ricky Stuart has some real issues that can’t be sugar coated and need sorting quickly.

      • May 14th 2017 @ 7:43pm
        Gray-Hand said | May 14th 2017 @ 7:43pm | ! Report

        Ricky Stuart seems to be a coach who can get one or two good seasons out of a team but then runs out of ideas.

      • Roar Guru

        May 14th 2017 @ 9:40pm
        Magnus M. Østergaard said | May 14th 2017 @ 9:40pm | ! Report

        They have the talent, unfortunately very little of that is in the spine. For most of the game I am wondering what Sezer and to a lesser extent Austin and Wighton actually do in the team.

      • Roar Guru

        May 15th 2017 @ 7:32am
        Edward Kelly said | May 15th 2017 @ 7:32am | ! Report

        The Raiders look to be getting their usual mindset that they can make a late charge into the finals. They never seem to be worried about their for and against. They do not have the mindset of a consistent top 8 team.

        And what is it with Blake Austin having a mouthful of chewing gum during the game?

      • May 15th 2017 @ 11:02am
        Agent11 said | May 15th 2017 @ 11:02am | ! Report

        I didn’t even watch the game but I knew we would lose. The Knights could smell blood after our pathetic second half against the bulldogs 2 weeks ago and they took advantage. I think we’ll come good later in the season but it’s certainly worrying the way they are playing right now.

      • May 16th 2017 @ 11:59am
        Rupert said | May 16th 2017 @ 11:59am | ! Report

        Not sure if:
        1. Stuart is a good coach when compared to Bellamy etc:

        90% of Raiders’ play is up the middle although most of the team’s talent is in the backs.
        eg Against Newcastle, Leilua didn’t touch the ball for the first 20 minutes.

        There is no observable team structure for the last 5 minutes before half and full-time
        to protect a lead or catch up a small deficit.
        eg Austin can drop kick a goal 60m but finds it difficult to get in position and pot a field goal 30m out.

        OR

        2. Stuart may have previously over-coached.
        Now, especially with some ‘players with flair’ not responding to structure, structure is minimized so that the team operates on a system of Laissez Faire.

    • May 14th 2017 @ 7:14pm
      TigerMike said | May 14th 2017 @ 7:14pm | ! Report

      Mitchell Moses lol one of the Top Four Kick-Offs out on the full!
      Send him to Parra if they’ll pay us his full years 2017 salary now

    • May 14th 2017 @ 7:36pm
      Alex L said | May 14th 2017 @ 7:36pm | ! Report

      Teams have figured out the Raiders now; their main method of getting onto the front foot is through Rapana and Leilua in broken play (usually returning kicks) — if you control them and prevent Hodgson having space around the middle, they’ve not got a lot of potency.

    • May 14th 2017 @ 7:53pm
      Roberto said | May 14th 2017 @ 7:53pm | ! Report

      Just because a player gets injured, we have to change the rules. This is a contact sport for crying out loud.
      David Mead himself got kneed in the back similar situation against the Rabbits fielding a bouncing ball mid-air on his goal line – he too spilled the ball and Rabbits almost scored. Where was the uproar there?
      Unfortunate for young Tom but Mead was already in flight commited in contesting for the footy, lets not sensationalise this by saying he intentionally took him out.

      • Roar Guru

        May 14th 2017 @ 8:07pm
        eagleJack said | May 14th 2017 @ 8:07pm | ! Report

        Player safety is paramount to the competition moving forward. And keeping, maintaining and even attracting new fans.

        When issues with rules are identified, it is only natural to look to amend them. Only a select few believe this rule shouldn’t be changed. And interestingly they all seem to be Brisbane fans. This isn’t about David Mead intentionally taking him out. It was an accident. But the rule should be in place to protect our players, to make attackers think twice before making the tackle.

        It was originally brought in to protect defenders as the ball could be put up and leave the defensive player in a precarious position. They have no choice but to jump for it and the attacking team could drive through to really hurt them. How is the ball bouncing any different?

        The game could lose a genuine superstar for the year. I don’t know about anyone else but I want all the top players on the field every week. Obviously injuries happen. But surely, if they can be avoided by a change in rule, then we should definitely look at it.

        • May 14th 2017 @ 8:44pm
          Gray-Hand said | May 14th 2017 @ 8:44pm | ! Report

          A player has three options:
          1. Get in position and take the ball on the full.
          2. Get there late, let it bounce and take it on the ground.
          3. Get there late, let it bounce, jump to catch it and put themselves in a vulnerable position.

          Turbo rolled the dice on option 3 and was unlucky. No different to a player diving at a ball and catching a knee in the face, or a player attempting to catch a hospital pass above head height and getting slammed in the ribs. It’s a contact sport.

          No rule change is necessary.

          • May 14th 2017 @ 8:55pm
            Steve said | May 14th 2017 @ 8:55pm | ! Report

            Agree completely. What about the bloke who gets nailed from a hospital pass? Change the rule? Can’t tackle someone “too hard” if they’ve been given an ordinary pass? What about someone jumping for a high pass?

            Can’t dive on someone on the ground who has dived on the ball?

            Its an unfortunately injury, but no rule change needs to occur.

          • Roar Guru

            May 14th 2017 @ 9:19pm
            eagleJack said | May 14th 2017 @ 9:19pm | ! Report

            Defending players in the air should be protected. It’s simply common sense. The other points you put out are red herrings.

            Attacking players are a different beast.

            I think rugby union has it right. When a player is in the air you can’t hit them til they touch the ground. Yellow card if you do.

            Don’t put out this “contact sport” stuff. Shoulder charges have been outlawed and the same rhetoric was thrown around by those who wanted them kept.

            It’s not particular “tough” to hit a man when he is off the ground collecting a kick.

            • May 14th 2017 @ 9:44pm
              Gray-Hand said | May 14th 2017 @ 9:44pm | ! Report

              No. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and the current line is right where it should be.

              Currently, the rules protect a player taking a kick on the full. Without that rule, attacking teams would be able to target defending wingers and fullbacks by putting up high kicks and taking them out when they leap for them.

              But the current rule only gives protection to a player that is skilled enough to get in position to take the balk on the full. The current rule rewards and protects skill.

              If a player isn’t good enough to get there in time, he either had to take the ball on the ground or takes the risk of getting a heavy tackle.

              If the rule was changed to protect any player who takes to the air to catch a ball … well, come on, we all know what will happen. Players will be hopping and jumping about to take grubber kicks.

              The current rule is a good. By all means, punish a tackler that puts a ball catcher in a dangerous position by tipping him upside down or sonething, but that’s not what happened with Turbo and Mead. It wasn’t a malicious or even reckless tackle. Turbo landed on his feet and twisted awkwardly. That happens in a contact sport sometimes.

              • Roar Guru

                May 14th 2017 @ 9:51pm
                eagleJack said | May 14th 2017 @ 9:51pm | ! Report

                I think a common sense approach would be warranted. Of course with our below average officials giving them a grey area is fraught with danger.

                But a defender leaping for a bouncing ball as we saw on Saturday night is a little different to someone jumping for a grubber searching for a penalty. It would be quite easy to distinguish.

              • Roar Guru

                May 15th 2017 @ 9:23am
                Jay C said | May 15th 2017 @ 9:23am | ! Report

                EJ, you can’t change it. I was it the game and it wasn’t pretty and we all hope Tom is ok.

                But he didn’t need to jump. He chose to jump. Why is the onus entirely on the other player.

                I can see why the cry for a role change has gone up, but it will not work, and is a slippery slope.

                What if someone jumps to take a grubber, what about a pass?
                What about of you just bunny hop down the field?

                The high ball contest is already a joke with penalties blown against the attacking team seemingly at random.

                Common sense doesn’t exist within the NRL referee ranks. You’re asking for more grey area to be introduced mid season, the exact thing we usually rage against.

                Tom was unlucky, but he put himself in that position, maybe because he didn’t know the rule.

              • Roar Guru

                May 15th 2017 @ 9:43am
                eagleJack said | May 15th 2017 @ 9:43am | ! Report

                Jay C welcome back!

                I guess you could ask why does any defending player have to jump for the ball? They don’t need to. Plenty of bombs are defused whilst standing on the ground.

                But once they are in the air they should be protected. They are vulnerable, put in that position due to the opposition teams tactics to hoist a bomb.

                And again I’m not sure why people immediately point out that attacking players would just “bunny hop” down the field. This rule is to protect the defending players. Surely we can understand that.

                It’s a common sense approach. Which I realise can only be trouble for our officials who get others to tie their shoes. But surely it should be up for discussion at year’s end.

              • Roar Guru

                May 15th 2017 @ 10:08am
                Jay C said | May 15th 2017 @ 10:08am | ! Report

                Thanks mate.

                I really think it is fine the way it is. It was really very unlucky. I don’t think there was any malice in it from Mead. He just lands awkwardly. Hopefully you get some good news today, I have been living watching him play.

                This weekend had really stuffed my supercoach team.

            • May 14th 2017 @ 9:46pm
              Haz said | May 14th 2017 @ 9:46pm | ! Report

              “Defending players in the air should be protected”…”Attacking players are a different beast”..?? Best definition of: contradiction.

              • Roar Guru

                May 14th 2017 @ 9:51pm
                eagleJack said | May 14th 2017 @ 9:51pm | ! Report

                How so?

                The rule was brought into protect defending players as they were forced to jump for high balls, and attacking teams could target them to really hurt them whilst in the air.

                Gray-hand is talking about hospital passes thrown while attacking. It’s a different beast. And completely unrelated.

              • May 15th 2017 @ 6:04am
                Gray-Hand said | May 15th 2017 @ 6:04am | ! Report

                Surely you don’t think an attacking player attempting to catch a bomb on the full put up by his half back should be allowed to be taken out in mid air?

              • Roar Guru

                May 15th 2017 @ 9:24am
                Jay C said | May 15th 2017 @ 9:24am | ! Report

                Of course they should. We call that Rugby League.

              • May 15th 2017 @ 2:53pm
                Haz said | May 15th 2017 @ 2:53pm | ! Report

                EJ, to me you’re argueing that defending players in the air need to be protected, but attacking players in the air don’t. That sir is a contradiction, or hypocrisy. Take your pick. If you want players in the air to be protected, then apply the rule to ALL scenarios. Then see what happens.

          • May 15th 2017 @ 11:30am
            Lovey said | May 15th 2017 @ 11:30am | ! Report

            Yes, I agree. I don’t think you can draft a rule that a tackle may only be performed whilst player is on ground, in possession. You would also have to distinguish between attacking and defending players. And players would milk it, another blight.

            There was no intent to injure in this case IMO. And doesn’t AFL have such mid-air collisions all the time?

        • Roar Guru

          May 14th 2017 @ 9:43pm
          Magnus M. Østergaard said | May 14th 2017 @ 9:43pm | ! Report

          Its a one off accident that should even call for rule changes. Its highly unfortunate and I think it sucks what happened to Turbo, but it was simply an accident. You are allowed to tackle attacking players in the air as long as no one is placed in a dangerous position and theres no injuries there.

          • May 15th 2017 @ 10:19am
            KenW said | May 15th 2017 @ 10:19am | ! Report

            +1 on this. I don’t think this is a particularly dangerous missing rule – it’s just a freak accident. A rule to protect players jumping for a bouncing ball could introduce all sorts of weird interpretations and behaviours to take advantage. In the meantime, can anybody point to the last serious injury that would have been saved by the rule?

            • Roar Guru

              May 15th 2017 @ 11:01am
              Magnus M. Østergaard said | May 15th 2017 @ 11:01am | ! Report

              Yow Yeh is the last serious jumping injury I can think of outside of twisted ankles and the like. And he wasn’t being tackled or anything, simply a jump. Perhaps ban jumping.

            • Roar Guru

              May 15th 2017 @ 11:26am
              eagleJack said | May 15th 2017 @ 11:26am | ! Report

              Can you point to the last serious injury that was caused by tackling any player in the air, when the ball reached them on the full?

              What about lifting tackles? Only one serious spinal injury there that I can recall, so perhaps bring them back?

              It’s all about prevention, and foresight. This is a silly rule with the potential to cause serious injury to our players.

              No we aren’t seeing injuries of this type every week. But leaping for a ball whether on the full or whether it has bounced is identical.

              • May 15th 2017 @ 3:16pm
                Gray-Hand said | May 15th 2017 @ 3:16pm | ! Report

                It isn’t identical.
                Leaping for a ball on the full is the result of good positioning by the defender (or a mediocre kick), and should be rewarded, which the rules currently provide for by making the jumper immune to being tackled in the air.
                Leaping for a ball that has bounced shows either poor positioning by the jumper or expert placement by the kicker, and the defender doesn’t deserve any favours from the rule book.

                Just like taking a hospital pass, the defender can make a choice to take a risk or play it safe.

              • Roar Guru

                May 15th 2017 @ 3:32pm
                Magnus M. Østergaard said | May 15th 2017 @ 3:32pm | ! Report

                The main difference is that when a ball is caught on the full you will have the defender catching the ball and then the attacking team steaming through toward the defender, that complete differences in speed are where the hazards lie.

                This injury wasnt caused by putting the player in a dangerous position, its more of a case of an unfortunate position.

              • May 16th 2017 @ 2:26pm
                Larry1950 said | May 16th 2017 @ 2:26pm | ! Report

                C’mon EJ, if turbo had tackled Mead & manly scored a try, you’d be cheering the house down. You’re historical comments indicate you’re not a bronco fan by a long shot & that colours your view. It would be impossible to police a rule where the defender can leave the ground to avoid being tackled in a bounced ball situation, just too subjective. I’m a great fan of both turbo brothers but it’s just bad luck, not as tough as the incident that forced Yow Yeh to retire. He should have contested the high ball, that would have taken all debate out of the situation. Bad error of judgement.

                As for DCE’s dive, within the letter of the law but a bad look, he must have struggled to keep a straight face during the press conference questioning. I’m only a bit biased, he’s a favourite and in my Qld team if JT is out, I reckon he’s been given a bum deal in the past & would love to see him as Broncos long term halfback, alas that’s not going to happen.

    • Roar Rookie

      May 14th 2017 @ 7:55pm
      Pedro the Saint said | May 14th 2017 @ 7:55pm | ! Report

      I can honestly say apart from the where the Storm sit the field is not what i thought it would be Saints included.
      In seeing the Raiders / Panthers struggling i think the Panthers will turn the corner…. not sure for the Raiders.

      As usual the injury fronts are taking their toll so on that note if the Titans right the ship they should finish the second half of the season strongly.

      • Roar Guru

        May 15th 2017 @ 9:26am
        Jay C said | May 15th 2017 @ 9:26am | ! Report

        Saints are doing better than anticipated. I still don’t think they make the 8.

    Explore:
    , ,