At half-time it looked all so different though as Bath scored a couple of tries that found us wanting defensively, and they appeared to be running the show.

In discussion over the half-time pint, there was a general agreement we were lucky the score was that close at the break, and surely we would be in for a torrid second period.

Luckily the team were not thinking the same.

I do not know what was said in the dressing room or indeed what was put in the tea, but in the second half the lads came out all guns blazing and took the game to Bath again and again.

They turned the game around to lead 28-21 at one stage before a late score from the visitors shared the spoils at 28-28.

The big question was though, was a draw a fair reflection on the game?

The answer was probably no, and not just from a Saints perspective.

Even Bath coach Steve Meehan hinted that his side were lucky to get the draw and the controversy was over two 'tries' that the Saints were not credited with.

I know referees cannot give tries on a crowd's reaction, but certainly the way the corner erupted for James Downey's score you would have to say it was good, as if there is ever a chance it was held up you get a more muted reaction.

Tom Smith's was perhaps not so clear cut, but Saints officials confirmed afterwards that their video of the game confirmed both were valid scores.

Therein lies the problem.

Refs are on a hiding to nothing in these situations.

Yes, Mr Rose might be accused of bad positioning, but he and his touch judges (I still can't get used to the moniker referees assistant) cannot always be the all seeing eyes we expect them to be, while the advantage of video and especially the use of slo-mo and freeze frame will nine times out of 10 give you a more precise answer than a split second decision by a ref.

So if the technology is there, why don't we use it?

It is already used for games covered by television, so why not all games at this level?

Surely some laws for some games and not others makes a lop-sided competition.

I would argue that those clubs on television more often, and come season end it's the usual suspects year-in year-out, are more advantaged if they are a riding-high attacking side (or disadvantaged if you are a lowly side defending against them) by the use of the video ref.

You might also argue that in the big scheme of things, these incidents level themselves out as you win some, you lose some on these decisions, but that makes it even more of a lottery in my mind.

Were those tries, or just one of them, awarded on Saturday it would have meant three extra points for the Saints.