They only gave him a 2 year deal, I wouldnt say that was long term.

Exactly. The board obviously see him as a stopgap, and if he exceeds expectations then great. The fact is, if he was sacked, who would we bring in? A top coach like Cullen? Someone with no experience like Sculthorpe?

The fact of the matter is, he has been given an aging squad with the money to make two signings (some would argue one and a half, as I'm guessing that Fozzard is on peanuts). People say we are playing boring one man rugby, but then state that all our backs are rubbish, so what do they expect? He isn't a miracle worker, I'm sure if he could make Gidley five years younger and Gardner a few yards quicker he would.

I have noticed for 3 seasons that our standards are slipping, it was plainly obvious under Anderson. People quickly forget the five game losing streak under his leadership, culminating in an embarrassing loss in the snow away at Castleford, before going undefeated until the Grand Final against Leeds. I think it is wise to reserve judgment for a good couple of months yet.

Indeed. So do we all. That's just the point. They looked on Saturday just as they looked at the end of last season, except their defence was abysmal. I can't remember the last time I saw Saints miss I think it was six tackles all in one move, culminating in Briscoe's try.

To clarify, they:
Dropped the ball
Passed so slow they are inviting interceptions and gang tackles
Looked clueless near the tryline
Forgot dummy runners
Did not support each other
Passed from standing still
Passed inaccurately
Continued to barge up the middle even though we were getting nowhere with that tactic
Eastmond as first receiver - again - passing out to Pryce - again
Looked tired
Did not function as a team
AND
We couldn't defend to save our lives

The list before the AND was exactly the same as last season. So many of us feel like there hasn't [ibeen[/i an off season.


We [islipped down[/i to second last year because for the best part of the first half of the season we were playing in the same manner as we were playing under Daniel Anderson, so we had accumulated a goodly number of points. That was in spite of Potter's determination to change our lineup virtually every match. However, once Potter's influence began to take hold, our play began to deteriorate. We lost five out of our final eight matches. We lost more matches over one season under Potter than we did during any season under Daniel Anderson.

Judging the way many teams have emerged from their off-season - fresh, determined, clued up - ours clearly has done us no good at all. If we had come out fighting with ball skill and sure hands, creativity and ingenuity then I wouldn't be complaining, even if we had lost. However, with the exception of the try attempt before halftime and the last ten minutes for Kyle Eastmond (who woke up or thought 'sod it' and decided to do the business himself, just as he did at the Grand Final), we showed nothing new on last season at all.

Hopefully, that will all change this weekend. Scuse me if my hope is hardly burning brightly.

Do we think Slick is aware of the criticism he is facing from the internet warriors? I bet he's heard tghe tales in the board room about how Blobby and his crew stormed the directors box after Millward's sacking armed with AK47s???

Will he hang on and ride it out so he can search for another job in Australia while still receiving the coin? Or will he not like it and leave?

I told you, a strategic campaign of potatoes in his exhaust and dog turn on his car door handles will give him the message.

Nothing serious enough to hurt him, or put him out, but just let him know how jarred off we are.

[size=50Please note, any post is in jest and in no way encouraging you to carry out such acts. I prefer the classic bum and burning.[/size

Probably. The Saints website have stopped messages from being shown under the two articles about the Hull match. You know there's a problem when big brother says no!


Yes.

I feel honoured that I am regarded in such high esteem. You are my crew, attack!!!

But he was the first coach to have a trophyless season since 2003 - and in his debut season, thats not the best start.

I'm not a fan of Potter, haven't been for a while, but I don't advocate any talk of his sacking. 1) because he's only been here for little over 12 months - any coach should be given two full seasons before being written off (fairly) as a failure....and 2) if we sack him, i struggle to think of any realistic appointment that would be anything other than a step backwards.

On the subject of preparation for the new season, people forget that the likes of Hull had a pre season that started last October.

The 2009 season never even saw them made it to the playoffs, so from the sides perspective, they finished playing early September. That gives them a hell of a lot of time to rest and recuperate. This also applies to other cellar dwellar sides. Its why IMO we often see the weaker teams start off strong, then fade when the real big guns get upto speed.

Now look at Saints pre season, and also i would say Leeds as well. Their league season finished mid October, so with a months rest, pre season would only start November at the earliest. Now remember that Saints and Leeds both had significant numbers of players in the international set up, which meant they were playing RL till the back end of November. Hence we have the likes of James Graham commenting that his pre season was about one month, due to being given December off to recover.

Saints had Roby, Graham, Eastmond, Wilkin and Moore all playing in the internationals. So that means that quite a bit of our new playmaking nucleus didnt get much time to work on moves etc. Is it therefore any wonder that we are a little slow out of the blocks and looking ring rusty in the creative department.

The same also applies to Leeds by the way, who struggled against Celtic and were noticably battered by a Castleford side that doesnt possess anything like the firepower of Hull.

For me some of the issues at Saints are structural, and Potter has been given the job of building a new team for the decade ahead. He has taken on a tough and thankless task. His job is not to win trophys per se (they are a bonus), its to manage the transition, and to put in place the nucleus of a new era of success.

This is a difficult journey, and there will be some hard knocks to take along the way. However at the end of it, Saints will hopefully have the players with the skills to ensure the sides of the 21st centuries second decade, are as competitive and successful as those in the first decade.

I think its a fair analogy to say that Potters job is in some respects a mirror of Saints new stadium project. The new stadium has taken lots of planning and preparation over a number of years, and only now can we see the potential of whats to come. Along the way, the club, council and other officials have taken a lot of criticism and cynicism about whether the project was even serious. Now with the stadium nearing construction there is a general impatience to get it built. The key of course is not to rush, but to put everything in place, so its built right, and leaves a lasting legacy. "Rome wasnt built in a day" as the old adage goes.

It's wrong. It's fine as a theory, but reality doesn't reflect it. Potter is leaving at the end of the season and playing a terrible style of rugby with terrible execution and organisation isn't what he describes.

Potter was a stop gap, but for what? That is the interesting thing at the moment. He can't get a new deal, surely?

When was the Grand Final? 4 October, something like that? Hardly much out of September anyway. Besides, Wigan and Hudds were only one week earlier than us in breaking up for the hols but I don't see them struggling.


In the past we have had significant numbers on international duty: up to 8 players I believe. This year, in reality, only Graham, Roby and Eastmond played. Wilkin I think spent about 20 minutes on the pitch because of the injury to Shenton during the final and Moore was binned before we played Australia so he's had pretty much the same off season as everyone else. Strangely enough, Graham and Roby were two of our three best players on Saturday night and yet they really did have a shorter off season than most other players. Eastmond I'm sure would have been equally good had he not been tied to distributing the ball. So I don't think this element of your argument stands.


According to reports, Castleford kicked the Whinos to death. Presumably they played to their strengths, something Potter should take note of when coaching Saints.


That is not a valid reason for turning our rugby into a mistake-ridden dour spectacle. He can do both. We have enough talent on the field to play creative, enjoyable rugby as well as manage transition. Transition is not an excuse for the kinds of errors and limited moves we have been watching since June time.

He's got a 2 year contract, let's see how he's going at the end of it.

Since we last won the title in 2006 we've lost: Lyon, Gilmour, Talau, Long, Scully, Baloo, Hooper, Cayless etc. Tell me that's not transition.

Potter's job was always to bring through the young players to deal with our transition. In his first year, the young players got lots of game time when fit and we reached (and could easily have won) the Grand Final.

We can judge the overall job by the end of this season, by which time the likes of Lomax and Wheeler will be first choices, Moore will have had a year around the team and Eastmond will have settled at 7 for a year. That is the time to judge Potter.

If the depths that our couple of transitional seasons plumb (between bringing through our promising youngsters and getting into the new stadium without spending full cap) consist of narrowly losing Grand Finals - I'll take that transition any day. It certainly beats the Wigan transition of near relegation and the Bulls' transition of missing the play-offs.

People talk about refreshing the squad, youngsters, patience . . . but when it comes to it - they're not prepared to accept it.

That's ignoring the fact that the league is far far better than it was when some of the same players we have now were racking up points for fun against dreadful squads.

thats right mate chases short kicking game was out of this world! Leeds ripped cas open enough times to win the game but turned the ball over and over again. We made loads of unforced errors, had a shocking completion rate and the kicking game was a non starter. If teams turn as much ball over as Leeds did against cas and to some extent Celtic they will get beat. I've seen a few fans point to the Leeds result to take the edge of their own but the fact is you guys and the bulls were never really in the game both hull and hudds were well infront and the games were never really a true contest. if the ball had stuck a bit more Leeds would have beat cas

Leeds were guilty of over playing, saints looked battered

So leeds were mistake ridden, sounds like an ill prepared side.

Also there are excuses for Hull over running us.
For a start we lost three players during the game due to injury, this effectively reduced our interchange bench to 1. It was therefore no coincidence that once interchanges came into play around the 30 minute mark that Saints dominance disintegrated.

yes they were mistake ridden. I'll prepared? I would imagine the triple champs prep is pretty good, but the warm up was very short. I think few players a still building fitness. Losing ablett on 5 mins and delaney on 50 Mins didn't help. But injuries are part of the game. There were enough positives from the game, Eastwood is gonna be a cracker, delaney looks like a real find(shame he had to go off) peacock looks really fresh as does jjb. We broke the line and punched so good holes in cas. We just bombed the next phase 3 or 4 times.

There were people on this site including me that never wanted potter from the start, and for me personally Ive not yet seen anything to make me want to change my mind.

Thats the reality, the board have made several mistakes and the quality coming in hasn't nearly matched that going out. So I personally would accept a drop off in competitiveness, the likes of Leeds, Warrington, Huddersfield, Hull KR having the beating of us. But what I can't accept is how we are playing. Both in terms of the style of our performances and the quality levels. Teams like Salford, Crusaders etc don't look as clueless as we do. I wouldn't mind boring, drab possession and safety based tactics if they were well executed and showed planning. But can all the sympathisers please state how much work they think the club has done on last play moves? On the kicking game? On planning sets and how to break down specific teams, on defensive patterns on highlighting opponents strengths? It's like Saints met an hour before kick off, shook hands and had a go, that is the kind of performance level it was, shambolic at times.

Exellent reply,sums up my feelings exactly.

Saddened, we don't always agree, but I agree with every word of that. I need a lie down...

I agree with that.

They were well executed enough for us to reach and nearly win the GF. They were not well executed enough for us to beat a fired up Hull side who played extremely well, on the back of a tough derby match, in bad conditions, with injuries picked leaving us down on interchanges.

The "sympathisers" are not excusing the poor rugby on show. If we don't improve I will happily clear Potter's desk for him at the end of the year. But I won't be deciding he should be sacked one game into a new season and I'm pretty sure the board won't be either.

Which leaves us fans with a choice. Do we get behind the coach and the squad in the knowledge that the coach and squad aren't going to change this season? Or do we b*tch and moan at every little thing and act like spoilt children who haven't been bought the newest toy for the first time in a decade (behaviour we have mocked Wigan/Wire/Leeds fans for in the recent past)?

Ditto