I've watched the Saints game now twice.

I'm not a coach but I'd really like to understand what we did technically that helped us win.

Are there any qualified coaches out there to answer this?

Before anyone says 'we scored more points' - sorry that doesn't answer my question! It's a serious one.

I can see we out enthused them, we had more desire particularly in the 50/50 areas and there was some great inside defence from what I could see (and defence from marker), plus we made only a handful of mistakes, but how did we nullify their threats - particularly in the forwards (Walmsley really didn't get into it) for example?

What tactics did Sam employ and the team carry out?

A lot is made of the fact we spread the ball wide and caused them trouble on the edges but you've still got to handle them when they have the ball. (And I don't fully subscribe to the view that Saints are 'slow' in the back. Makinson certainly isn't.

Appreciate any techncial answers.
Thanks.

Im not a coach so they’ll be not technical answers.

But it’s there to see that everyone’s game has been simplified. There is a unit work ethic, there are no sheep and no one has a role so large that it cannot be covered by another sufficiently well.
I would guess that by having a simpler system that energy levels are conserved that has it’s affect in the final quarter of the game.
The team is chasing back every defensive play, that didn’t happen before, and working like pack dogs in defence.

No one is bigger than the club.

Currie has took on more duties than he previously did, but he always had that in his game from covering stand off.

Whilst we wait for the technical analysis, one element I saw in attack was that we overcame Saints compressed defence by moving the ball wide quickly and accurately (Thewlis/Ashton/Williams tries). But we also scored a barge over try up the middle with clever deception from Powell and a hard running Harrison, and a try from a brilliant "cross bar" aimed kick from Williams.

In terms of physical match ups I think Fitzgibbon did a number on Walmsley, Harrison was immense, and the young lads in the pack tackled their guts out.

In terms of officiating, the referee (who had a flawless game) did not allow Saints their usual extended slowing of the ruck and they were broadly onside for most of the match. Two of Saints tactics they were unable to deploy.

Good topic.

Also not a coach and happy to be called out on this, but what I saw from our attack when going wide was that it was pacey but not based on pure pace.

By way of an uneducated explanation, we seemed to run our lines from deep and at a fuller tilt. This allows the passer to take it to the line at speed and angled and together with the receiver who's waiting to do the same it throws a lot of doubt into the defensive line whilst we are picking our targets.

Hayes is particularly good at this and often puts a slight delay (not a pump) into his pass when you as a defender are then out of position facing a Dufty, or a Wrench with more speed and footwork to contend with.

To be fair I remember Castleford under Powell using it against us at the HJ prior to him emigrating and for some reason I was behind the sticks in the West and thought where do you start picking these up shifting. They were almost hidden behind each other, overreact and your inside shoulder was toast.

I am no Coach but this was the second game of rugby i have watched so ill stick my two pence in.

Saints are extremely good at controlling the ruck IE speed at the play of the ball is dictated very well by them, so they look for the fast play of the ball in attack to keep your defence on the back foot and constantly scrambling we at times was on the back foot but nullified that and was able to turn them in the tackle on some occasions to slow it down, and again when they are defending (saints) they are good at keeping the attacking team at a slower of the ball pace that enables them to pressure the attacking team with the speed of the defence moving up. For me on sunday we seen glimpses of these but we controlled it and did it back. Goodluck deciphering my jibber jab

Thanks everyone so far for your input.
Even though you're not coaches you raise some good points and have some shrewd observations.
I really appreciate that.
Let's hope we do have some coaches or ex coaches amongst us.

Too modest Mr Gleeson!

With many Saints games over the decades that we have lost over the decades that I have been watching, has seen Wire contributing to their downfall by silly errors, penalties etc. Apart from the odd mistake last weekend, we were flawless.
Realistically, though I have to admit that Saints and some of their star players had an off day. Not to take anything away from Wire, they can only play what's in front of them.

It sounded much better in my own mind

Definitely not a coach but there were a few small observations.

Attack
It looked to me like there was a definite plan to attack behind the play the ball area. The forwards certainly made a point of attacking there and so did the backs.Ashton got some joy and a couple of quick play the balls by attacking directly behind the ruck. The refs are pretty hot on the markers not being square and are often calling players for not being square so the markers can't make the tackle. This looks like it then sucks in the edge defenders so when we do go wide they are our of shape.
I also thought we showed a bit of variety towards the end of sets by either kicking early (I think Williams kicked on the third tackle for Fitzgibbon to chase and force a drop out) and we ran on the last play a few times so the Saints back 3 didn't know if we were kicking early and had to drop back or we were going to run it.

Defence
Other then the line speed and enthusiasm I thought there were a couple of things
I noticed the when Saints were looking to shift that our centres looked to push up along with the 6/7 that gave saints only 2 options.
A) come back inside back towards our middles or
B) try and throw a hail mary pass over our centres heads. Knowing the speed that we have I don't think they fancied throwing an interception so we're more often than not forced back towards the middle.

One more thing that I am not too sure about. I did notice that when we were chasing a kick I spotted our opposite second rower defending on the other side of the pitch. So for example when Bennison let the ball dribble past him Fitzgibbon popped up on that side to get involved in the tackle. I have never really spotted that before as I had assumed that the second rowers sort of stay in their channel on a kick chase but it looked like it was done because the middles were struggling to close the distance. I could be wrong with that one. It could just have been a one off or it could have been going on for ages.