Anderson was completely out thought in his Grand Final tussles with Leeds. They blew us away. I'm not suggesting Potter is better than him just pointing out that Anderson was hardly a tactical genuis. He gave us strong defence (which was critical to our success under him) and that one move with Leon looping around but that's about it really. I don't really recall a moment where he did a Brian McClennan (and I'm just using McClennan because that's what he does exceptionally well as a coach) and completely shut down an opposition team by using his own tactical nous.

i think we didn`t qualify for the 2005 grand final because of injuries sustained at Wigan the week before the play offs.

So, despite us dusting Leeds on a regular occurance during Andersons reign, he was somehow outgunned in finals only? Seems strange. I agree that we were blown away in 2007. No question. I don't blame Anderson for that performance though. We beat Leeds 2 weeks previously in the qualifying semifinal. Do you honestly believe that Tony Smith could personally turn a 2 point defeat into a 27 point victory 14 days later by coaching nous alone? No chance. We bottled it that night without question.



I do agree that Anderson's finest point was his coaching of defence but the bloke needs at least some credit for his coaching ability. You don't win as much as he did with just a good defence.

Our record v Wire and Wigan this season reads L6 W0 D1 L5.



Excluding Good Friday when we played for the full 80 in the rest of the games the score has been



0-16 (Final score 16-16)

0-18 (Final score 18-25)

0-20 (Final score 10-32)

0-18 (Final score 28-35)

2-18 (Final score 12-1icon_cool.gif



In 5 of the 6 games we've not got past 2 when Wire/Wigan have been at 16 or 18, yet rallied well to make the scorelines always look respectable. It's hard enough beating Wire/Wigan without giving them 16 point starts all the time.

McClennan would be happy to give Anderson credit for his acheivements. The point some of us like to make (try to anyway), is that Potter gets absolutely no credit from some posters when, as any reasoned observer could see, he did alright.

The situation is inflamed when said critics then happily excuse other coaches of flaws that they would have villified MP for.

I'm not particularly arguing for or against Potter, more arguing for Anderson. I've got to say that Potter had us playing some of the most turgid rugby we've seen at KR for many a year. Other than that, his results stack up pretty well against most SL coaches. At this moment in time of our last 4 coaches, I'd have Anderson clear of Millward who is clear of Simmons and Potter who at this moment share equal billing. I do think that Simmons has seen a worse injury list than any of his predecessors but he certainly has his failings and I'm not convinced he's the man for the job.

That play off game in I think 2008 he did though. Leeds came in expecting a repeat of the previous year and a massive battle up the middle with the forwards, a real arm wrestle. DA got us throwing the ball around out wide and we destroyed them IIRC?

I know. I'm don't argue for Potter over other coaches we've had, but certain posters won't give credit were credit's due, which is unfair to a guy who ddid alright for the red vee.

I think the point is we did ok despite Potter rather than because of him. There were constant rumours that a number of players were unhappy under him and with his methods and as a fan I have never been as bored watching Saints as I was watching his teams. At the forum the reaction of the players on the panel to my question and the followup question 'what do you think he did well'? was pretty funny. A coach doesnt have to be liked but they need to be respected and I dont think Potter had the full respect of the squad

Wasn't that at home though?







I'm not dismissing his coaching ability just pointing out that tactically he's no Benitez. I would suggest that Maguire is a newer version of Anderson although we haven't seen enough probably of his tactical coaching to see. Tony Smith is certainly tactically wise, after all wouldn't he have been at the heart of planning Leeds' kicking game in those Grand Finals when they kicked us to death?

Yes, exactly. My original point was that Potter sent us to sleep in the second half (we would often be holding on to a lead that was slipping away from us) whereas Simmons wakes us up (we come to life and start playing). The above scores back that up. But my point was a flippant one in response to other flippant comments (specifically by McClennan), starting with the comment made at the fans forum that Potter's half time talks were boring.

In your opinion he did alright. In the opinion of those who don't agree with you, but instead who didn't think he did alright, he didn't do alright. If I felt so inclined, which I don't because I have debated this so often it bores me rigid now, I could put across a perfectly reasoned argument as to why I consider that Potter was NOT alright. I'm sure you could do so to suggest that he was alright.



It's just opinion. I was very glad to see him go and my view has not changed one iota since.

Let's hear it then?

At about the 65th minute mark we do I suppose.