Thought Byrne was good after his weeks off. Ran the ball in hard and was knocking people over.

He needs to be massive for us going forward.

Very poor game. Hull wanted a slow game and boy, did they get it! A mixture of dropped ball, terrible conditions and an incompetent ref contributed to a dire spectacle.

It's not the first time this that we've got sucked into this type of game. Last years play off semi defeat, KR semi, Catalans at home, Catalans at Magic and last night were all unbelievably stop start. When we go set for set with teams and keep the ball in play, we are at our best. Peet often speaks about getting fatigue into the game and he's spot on IMO.

Hopefully we learn soon, as you can just feel a similar night will be round the corner in the play offs.

Maybe just maybe peet isn't the man to take us to that next level of being a champion side.
Maybe and hopefully I'm wrong but can't be doing with another repeat of this season next year

It's been happening for a couple of years so clearly it's a deliberate tactic that we don't take the dull but safe option and play the percentages. We don't drive the ball into the corner for the opposition to try to run the ball out from right on their own line, or try to force repeat sets. I know it's not very exciting but they used to call it wet weather rugby for a reason. We try to score on pretty much every set which is a tactic some teams adopt but I've really got to question whether it actually works for us.

How many matches have we watched this year where the team tries to overplay at the wrong time or tries too hard to make things happen on the last tackle and comes up with an error or a play that allows the opposition to recover the ball and get out of danger?

Teams that can grind their opponents down and then be clinical with attacks at the right time tend to do well in the playoffs but we don't seem to want to play the percentages. I don't see how we'll trouble any top team playing like we did last night.

I don't think it's players going rogue or not following instructions - they've played like this most of the year and Matt Peet seems perfectly happy with it, so this is obviously coached to some extent but I'm really not sure it's getting the best out of the team. I've seen Harry Smith play the dullest, most predictable, no frills but effective rugby in the past. It's not like it's something he can't do so clearly he's being instructed not to and I find it baffling. He's not gone backwards in terms of game management we just don't seem interested in it.

It was frustrating because I thought we were the better team and made such a meal of it. Rather than having a bit of patience and trying to wear Hull down it was throw the ball wide as soon as possible and score on every play. We had some good territory and yet Hull didn't suffer as a result and their forwards weren't made to work hard enough because we just let them off the hook.

It was just a dire game from start to finish and I don't know which god we angered for us to have to sit through golden point extra time after that turgid mess.

Maybe I’m just getting more chilled or maybe it’s because I’ve got far more important things to worry about in life.

Yeah, it was a poor performance but it still resulted in a win. By a long way we are not favourites for anything but on our day I still think we can beat anyone. The effort and commitment was there & we certainly won’t win anything without that.

The Smith at first receiver is one I have mentioned a few times on here - it puts so much pressure on him to organise/start everything that it effects his game and means he cannot be anywhere near as creative and often gets hammered. The lack of a proper 6 kills us sometimes and this is one area where it does - a decent 6 could go in at first receiver and take some of the pressure off Smith. The French at 6 is ok in open games but in tight games with little space his lack of knowing how to play 6 is obvious and causes as many issues as it solves.

Peet obviously knows more about us than coaching a professional side so surely he can see that French at 6 is completely disjointing the team and completely nullifying his skill set. You have to wonder if French's contract negotiations went along the lines of "Sign this Bevan, we will give you more money, if an NRL side comes in we will let you go and don't worry, we will get you off the wing and into the halves where you want to be"

I am sure i read somewhere he was dropped at Parramatta because he didn't want to play on the wing. Somebody needs to tell him just how good a winger he is. I was ranking him up there with Offiah last year, he was THAT good. Big decisions need to be made. No way we win anything with French at 6, he is a strike player who is being stunted and there is no flow to any attack, aside from that, French keeps trying these flick passes that 8 times out of 10 hit the deck or go in touch. He is clearly uncomfortable there.

The question then becomes, where does he go? Who gets dropped? That is why Peet is paid the bucks though, we can save this season (Sounds stupid with us being in 2nd) but some big calls need to be made.

Is there not something of an overreaction going on to a win in poor conditions? It was the first game where French could be said to have regressed in a game where virtually everyone was poor. Every game previous has been a better than linear improvement. I'm not sure where this is coming from. We created the opportunities. We just didn't finish them. Had we finished the clear cut chances we had we would have won by 20+ points! Miski tripping over his own feet, for example, is not French's fault. Neither is all the dropped ball or the sheer incompetence from the referee.

The bottom line is, handling aside, we were by far the better team. Hull rarely made it out of their own half. We win in atrocious conditions whilst not playing well. We move on.

That was his best performance for months.

Played well and ran hard, was better than their highly rated props