He'd also get us some structure back in attack. I think he'd probably also help bring on some of the young lads in the squad. Sadly he'll still have the problem of not having a single experienced halfback in the squad.

One things for sure, if he was in charge still he wouldn't have gone into the season without a experinced halfback and certainly wouldn't have signed a fullback to play halfback.

I'm with you in this minority.

Our rugby was relentless - cruel defence, total respect of possession and played the game in the oppositions half for the most part. But, bloody hell, it was tedious at times.

During the 2006 season, which brought unprecedented success for Saints, I don't recall leaving the stadium feeling that breatheless wonder that a top game of RL can do to you.

I'm not convinced Simmons is the right bloke, but when we replace him, I want a coach who'll bring back the exciting brand we're renowned for.

And not Millward. I can do without the 50, 60, 70 point humilations, ta.

Boring winning > exciting losing > boring losing

Edit.

As I say, I'm not convinced RS is the guy and it's been a while since I can say we've played the brand of rugby that I love to watch (pains me to say it but Wire are the closest to it at present), but DA isn't either - he had a far better playing roster than Simmons, and was clearly outcoached by McClennan when it mattered.

If new blood is needed, let's make it new.

As in the post above, that team was capable of exciting winning, maybe even better suited to it with some of the flair players in the squad. As Wayne Bennett would say, don't die with the music in you. Or as the Brian Smith coaching school would say, die with the ball in your hands, and kick on the 5th.

Whilst I think the monkey thing is OTT, I do agree that Anderson was far from the perfect coach and indeed the whole Brian Smith stable of coaches have similar flaws, i reckon he'd have us on a much steadier ship right now.

Let's see what Saturday brings. I'm almost over last friday and am starting to feel unduly positive again.

No to Anderson. Yes to him coming to coach our defence but no to his attacking flair. Having one move in rugby league i.e. the loop around move, is no longer good enough. Look at Hull on Friday. They weren't mega but still had good ball control and more than one move in their playbook which gives them at least one more than Anderson had.

You're assuming Anderson hasn't adapted his coaching style in the years since he has been gone. Millward used to hate the notion of defence yet Leigh defended well under him and Cas were showing signs of increasingly good defence prior to the tragedy which resulted in Millward taking time off.

The return of Daniel Anderson could be just what this rather mentally weak side needs.

That all well and good but he isnt coming so we have to deal with what we have.

Whilst i agree with what you say about going in without an experienced halfback (it would help immensly right now if we had one) can i just mention,Pryce who wasnt a 6 ( Anderson would of had to agree his signing for the position ),Lockyer who started as full back,Widdop who started at full back, and im sure there are many other examples that prove starting at fullback doesnt rule you out of being a halfback.

Aha, I see where you are going with this. Wellens started at half back before becoming a full back, you are suggesting him as the solution to our half back problem?

I think we can reshuffle our deck all day long, in the end the team on the pitch is good enough, we've not been hammered, but they are hardly at full tilt of their capabilities either.

Exactly, weary not be firing on all cylinders but we have been a gnats kipper from winning all of these games. Somerimes things just don't go for you, at the minute things are just not going saints way. Better now than on October.

If you think Anderson was 'far' from the perfect coach (God knows what he would have needed to be to be perfect seeing as there are only so many trophies a team can win)and................now you are feeling 'unduly' positive about meeting a shockingly awful bradford team.What a strange juxtaposition wondering how much positivity you felt was 'undue' under our finest coach contratsed to your tongue in cheek optimism (you are being sardonic ,are'nt you?)

Mmmmm gnats kipper,sounds inviting if we had come from 20 points behind and nearly plucked it by a gants whisker but to be up front and have other teams do a 'Saints' on Saints doesnt make it sound so never say die optimism we are poor no gettin away from it.Even if we had won we are still a poor outfit and this 'wait till October HOPEFULLNESS' IS ALL WELL AND NOBLE BUT WERE CACK

Nice use of the word finest.

As our most successful coach is Milward.


Anderson was not a poor coach, but neither was he our most successful.

I'm not happy with the tendancy of some Saints fans(same ones who would have supped lager out of his sweaty clog when Saints where at their pomp) who come out of the closet and deride Andersons achievments ,fans are very fickle .With fans like that who needs enemies?

Don't worry, I'm certainly not contradicting myself. Whilst I'm surprised how many people agreed with me as he seems like the 'golden coach' to most Saints fans I have met, Iike I stated earlier in the thread I have never been a fan of his. This is a coach who was able to leave Nick Fozzard out as we had four props better than him for crying out loud, that squad would have won things with Cullen coaching them. Yet we played as if we had nothing outside of those props half of the time.

Perhaps it's you that thinks the fans are deriding his achievements. Most of the responses I read that are not that in favour of him returning appear to be more along the lines of putting a context around what he achieved so as to provide a more balanced viewpoint to the inevitable rose-tinted spectacles effect.

Like him or otherwise Anderson achieved far far more than our last two coaches ever have. We had a top team yes,but he still sorted the defence out ( Averaged 14 pts against per match in his last season ?). In order to win matches you must have a dominate defence. Under Millward we had to score over 20pts per match, Now it's more like 30.

I think Anderson was a very organised coach, and he could probably plan a victory on most days of the week. Consistency was his biggest asset both in terms of his approach and the player roster. When you are dominating sides you can play entertaining rugby and Anderson did have some entertaining Rugby. But saying he was a very good coach does not mean that we cannot say with the talents he had, winning the GF more than once should have been acheivable.

Anderson won in his first full year at Saints and so that helps with the reflections on his later seasons. The stability period was also welcome for some fans after a polarising period with Milward, who split fans of Saints, other clubs and even his own players.

Under millward saints were an often inconsistent side who always produced on the big stage.

Anderson then made saints a consistent team, who [ioften[/i (notice i say often, not always, before you get uppity) faltered on the big stage.

'But, but what about those challenge cups, and that grand final?''

Leeds was the only tough team saints met in a major final of that era. Every other team was pretty average, turned up and stunk the place out. A few of those challenge cup finals definitly spring to mind. Hull in 2006 were decent I guess.

The point is, since anderson took over, saints have started losing lots of finals when they play decent teams. In making them consistent, week in week out robots, he took away some of that spark that always helped them in the grand finals.

There was a time when saints were 5/5 in grand finals!.....and then leeds came along.

Potter took over, and just made saints a less consistent week in week out.

Simmons took over.....and appears to have made saints a little less consistent week in week out. The spark, declining gradually with each new appointment.

I have no idea why any saints fan would want anderson back. He won the title with an awesome team. Saints have nowhere near the personel they had then on the books now. Anderson would simply guide saints to higher regular placing again. Nothing more.

Saints next coaching appointment should be someone who will inject spark back into the way the team play. You can win the grand final from anyweher in the top 5 so week in week out consistency is not as much a necessity.

Anderson was a fantastic defence coach undoubtedly. Didn't we lose 4 games all season by something silly like 1,2,3 and 4 points? I long for the days when we aren't conceding 20+ points a game but i think the game has moved on considerably from the last time DA was here. The attack is quicker, the talent is better and variety in attack is a must.

Likke McLennan said, his attack was absolutely dire relying on the flair of Pryce and Long to manufacture something from nothing. It would often be one play that teams could see a mile off, much that Briers round the back to the centre one that Warrington have been doing for countless amounts of years but people still occasionally fall for.

DA was outclassed in 2 Grand Finals by a Leeds side with more attacking flair and a better understanding of the conditions. His tactics were poor and we rightfully got beat.

2008 First 10 games under Anderson

Saints 22 V 24 Hull KR
Saints 30 V 22 Warrington
Saints 22 V 16 Bradford
Saints 34 V 30 Wakefield
Saints 30 V 29 Hull
Saints 10 V 24 Cats
Saints 46 V 10 Wigan
Saints 26 V 28 Hudds
Saints 10 V 14 Leeds
Saints 24 V 30 Cas

Played 10, Won 5 Lost 5, Points conceded 227.

Hardly the mythically wonderful defensive side that people's history tinted spectacles are making out.

Anderson would do no better than Simmons with this side, and would certainly have done no better last year. There is a very good reason why he is unemployed.