DA was a top coach and it was obvious the played respected him and he also hada nasty streak in him. Players knew he was no mug and didn't think much of reputation.

He also was very good in terms of organising us defensively which IMO sets him above Ian millward.

DA was also tactically sound, something we've not had fir 3 years.

He may have beaten Wigan 4 times out of 6, but Wigan were nowhere near as strong in 2009 (where 3 victories came from) as they were last year and still are now, and I think if this seasons team played against Wigan of 2009, we would win a lot more convincingly than we did that year.

In 2009, he took us on a run starting after Round 22, where we lost the CCSF, 3 league games and a GF(5 games out of 9 we played)...and in all of these games could not manage to score 20 or more points - at no point in all the time of watching Saints have we ever scored less than 20 points in 9 consecutive games) His attacking play was appauling and we often didnt look to have any idea - and that was including a fully fit Leon Pryce, Keiron Cunningham, Matt Gidley and Kyle Eastmond when Long was missing - all of who we have missed massively this year imo

At no point that I remember under Potter did we have 11 first choice players out injured and be as depleted as we have been this season and we are playing far better rugby now than over the past 2 years on the whole for me. The players obviously werent happy with Potter either looking at comments made by KC and Gardner which will have also had a negative effect on things. Royce is a massive improvement on Potter, mind you saying that my grandad possibly has more motivation and inspiration in him than Potter and he's been dead 10 years!!

Until we faced Leeds at Old Trafford.

I don't want to start an argument here, but only quoting part of my post doesn't really make sense. Why would you cut this part of my post out of your quote

only to then post this yourself in order to disagree with me

This is what has caused a stand off on these boards. Posters like myself don't think Potter was perfect, but appreciate that, given what he had at his disposal, didn't do badly, especially we were tipped by some so called experts to finish outside the top 4, had "a back line worse than wakefield's" and had a lot of senior players moving on.
We could have done a lot worse and I'm not completely sure the messiah that is Daniel Anderson would have faired much better.

Plus we beat WIgan last year -at the DW, which is priceless. He also didn't lose to wire

I wasnt trying to start an argument, I was agreeing with what you had said in those points, hence why I only quoted that bit to expand on what you had said



Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but for me personally Potter was the worst coach we have had for a long time and did more negative than positive for us. I think given the same time period as Potter had, Simmons is capable of lifting silverware but only time will tell whether that is right or not.

I too, think Royce could guide us to a trophy next year, especially if McGuire leaving Wigan has the effect we're all hoping for! We've got some very exciting players in the squad. If we can get the ball going to the right aswell as we do to the left and have a kciking game somewhere in the 13, then we'll be a very dangerous side.
As I said, Potter had his pros and cons, but he was perhaps the first coach in SL we had that had real limitations in terms of salary cap and quotas, he had a lot of injuries and senior players leaving and still got up up to 2nd in the competition, so why he cops as much flack as he does I don't know.

I don't recall him missing tackles or bottling it.

I don't remember him having a particularly winning tactical set up in both the games either though.

But you do remeber Mick Potter doing so?

His tactics worked fine against Leeds at any other time in the season, including play offs. And he could beat other teams at GFs and CC finals.

We didn't beat Leeds at the GF under Potter either. We didn't beat Wigan there under Potter either. And with Potter there was no Challenge Cup to lessen the blow either. There was under Anderson.

Some people are truly desperate in trying to justify Potter's existence. It's rather funny! Tends to be the same few people, with one or two appearing out of nowhere with their 'Potter Spotter' bleeping away.

The most vocal was KC. Puletua was just laughing when KC was describing how potter worked. When asked about the best coach he worked under KC said Anderson.

I think just proves what alot of people suspected about the dressingroom under potter

The funny thing is both KC and Ade didn't have a bad word to say about any other coaches they worked under..

Is anyone else surprised to hear KC flagging off another coach? Although it is funny and no doubt true it does seem a bit unprofessional to get involved on this sort of thing

He's not slagging him off. He's making a humourous tale out of goings on at the club in the context of a forum for Ade's testimonial.

Potter's a former coach; nothing to do with the club anymore. I'd suggest that means everything's up for discussion.

And as said, they were having a laugh in the context of Ade's do. Have you been to any forums? They're great.

I don't think there's many in that camp. I'm of the opinion that Potter did a decent job, nothing less, nothing more. He was nowhere near the level of Anderson and neither is Simmons on current evidence.

Nicely and concisely put sir.

Just a point in question DA was not the Messiah he was more of a late John the baptist. Strong popular and effective. Milward was the Messiah he brough a new way of doing things. Spoke his mind regardless of the consequences. Split opinions. And was Saints most successful coach ever and if the sacking had waited until the off season would have probably got the double done in his last year.

Well, 9 times out of 10 Simmons has got a positive reaction from his team in the second half. In Potter's day, 9 times out of 10 we'd be holding on for grim death in the second half. So at least Simmons doesn't send the players to sleep at halftime.

I wish I could make it to forums, but its a bit of a trek! Last one I went to was in the theatre royal in about 1977, can't rememebr whos testimonial it was, maybe Kel Cosletts. Was a very funny night, even if I was a little young to appreciate some of the more adult jokes, although I do remeber one about Fanny Craddocks doughnuts, which probably dates it a bit!

It was indeed hilarious. A great night all round with some funny stories.

I think Potter was the best we could hope for at the time we got him. He gave alot of those players who are full squad players there first airing. With DA he had no need to play youth. Potter gave Lomax. Wheeler. Foster. Smith. Eastmond. Dixon. Ashurst. Emmitt exposure to the top flight even frodsham got a game. For me he was good for youth development and consistent. He was a steadying hand. Not exciting and not a winner. But look at who else we could have got and rather than steadying a side on the down we could have had a drop like wigan or bradford. Royce has used kids in more quantiesd because of injuries but without Potter those kids would have been coming in green this year. Not to mention some impressed so much that other clubs offered enticing enough packages to draw them away from saints.

I didn't know whether you were a Saint from Somerset (but up here) or a Saint IN Somerset or in fact nothing whatsoever to do with Somerset, so I thought I'd ask anyway.

Fanny Craddock's doughnuts don't get an airing anymore but the forums are still a lot of fun.

I think this is a myth. He gave them all their debuts because they were promoted from the Academy the year he joined the Saints. He also gave Jamie Ellis his debut. He also gave Gaskell his debut. But he only stuck with Foster, Dixon, Ashurst and Emmitt with Lomax playing bit parts whenever he was fit. He had a full third of a season to integrate at least one of our young halfbacks into the role, playing with Jon Wilkin if he had to play a second rower in the halves. But he didn't do that. He played Ellis for two matches and Gaskell for one and a half. Simmons has played all the above regularly, showing faith in Gaskell and Lomax when he could have replaced at least one of them with either Eastmond (post suspension) or Wilkin (or both). But he hasn't. He has also given debuts to Makinson (who is now impressing us on the wing), Ashe, Hale and a forward whose name I can't remember.

And both coaches had to go with the youth due to injuries, with the exception of the left wing/centre combo because we didn't replace Talau.

Loved Basil.
Still do.
Lucky Cas.

Why do I fell embarassed?

As a fan I like him, but I do know he was not all the players cup of tea and had his favourites. I think even KC has said as much before now that Basil was not great with (all) the young players.

So yes he was the best but yes he was flawed.