When it comes down to winning things both Potter and Simmons are nearly men I'm afraid



You can make excuses for them and say they have been the victim of difficult circumstances but for me they are missing the extra level of leadership that turns a team into winners

It would be interesting to fast forward a couple of years to see if there's much difference between the senior players' views of Simmons and Potter.

He's not the messiah he's a very naughty boy!

Dont's disagree, but other than the Eastmond saga which Royce inherited how many other rumours of discontent have you heard? No smoke without fire

It was a major part of it in all grand final defeats to Leeds, less so against Wigan when we'd managed to introduce some pace into the team with Eastmond and Lomax.

We beat Leeds by 2 points at home, in another game in which we failed to score a try against them in a second half. Of course you can cling to the solitary close win we had that season rather than the other two losses.



It's quite easy to blame our back three due to the viewing of Sinfield kicking us to death and our ball returners being so slow that we were starting our sets on our 10/20 metre line and they were starting there on their 30/40, which was a major cause of all our GF losses to Leeds. We lost the territorial battle because of it and so lost the games, not due to the fact that Donald scored a try.



There wasn't a major debate over the lack of pace before hand because most hadn't noticed it due to us playing on mostly smaller pitches, some had discussed it but had been roundly derided (and still are by some). However it was a weakness that Smith spotted and used to it's fullest advantage, and McClennan carried it on subsequently. Anderson didn't rectify it, Potter attempted to with the introduction of Eastmond out wide and then Foster and Lomax afterwards.

I seemed to have stepped into a parallel universe were some people would rather be 18 points down and having a go, than in front and holding on. Bizarre.



To me, there's no debate who is better in potter or da, its da everytime, da wasn't perfect, it could be argued he left us with an aging squad, and I believe potter was on a hiding to nothing regardless.



The main debate is, is Simmons better than potter, and you can't look at saints and think our X is better than last year, not significantly anyway. Defence is better this year, by effectively 1point a game, but attack is down by a converted try in every game. Similarly I don't think our style of play is particularly more entertaining, for me we score far too many tries from 5 yards through the props, agreed they all count the same, but its hardly what you'd call entertaining. When did we last go the length of the length of the field.



I have no doubt ade speaks lowly of potter, don't forget potter preferred foster over Gardner at the end of last season, a move everyone on here would have agreed on



One game which stands out, we went to wigan last year with a team of wellens, foster, Gidley, flannery, meli, pryce, Moore, graham, kc, hargreaves, Clough, dixon, tp... Roby, fozzard, ashurst and Johnson... And we won, I'd say that is as weak as any team we've put out against wigan or wire this year.



Potter wasn't that great, put so far to me Simmons isn't a whole lot better, he deserves another year. But purely on this season he's no better than potter

Nail pretty much on the head there.



Wigan and Warrington have demonstrated the huge difference a top coach can have and we must make this our priority when Simmons' reign ends.



As for those wanting Millward back - seriously?

I enjoyed the trophies immensely, of course, but I'm sure there are other coaches could have managed the majority, if not all, of those victories without dragging the club through scandal after scandal, and some of the most painful slaughterings I've ever had to watch my team go through.

I seem to remember that we couldn't get out of our own half in the first half of the 2002 grand final against Bradford and were outplayed for huge parts. Deacon kicked us to death in that game as well and we weren't starting our drives on the 10/20 metre line....we were there on our 3rd or 4th tackle at times yet we somehow found a way to win. What I'm trying to is that certain parts of our team are always going to perform at different levels but my opinion is that the whole team underperformed in that Grand Final. You are saying that we lost as a team because the pitch was wider and 3 of our 17 players couldn't get the ball back quickly enough. I agree that was certainly a factor in defeat but to suggest that the other 14 players didn't underperform is wrong.



Why did Leeds not blast us off the park in 2008 and 2009 when we had the same, slower back 3?

Those of us who tend to defend Potter aren't doing so because we think he was the bees knees, or because we rate him higher than other coaches we've had. We do so because in his tenure we didn't do badly, especially given the hand he was dealt, but he has acusations levelled at him (imo unfairly) that make him out to be the worst thing to happen to the club in years.

You should know by now that there are no grey areas amongst Saints fans. A player or a coach is either the greatest thing ever or absolutely e. There is no in-between or good aspects and bad aspects.



I wish I could live in such a black and white world. It must be a very simple straight forward world to live in with no debate or dilemmas to consider. I'll bet you could live to be 110 in such a gradient free would.

Your right in the real world there is no black and white. White goes grey over time and black eventually fades to grey as do some peoples memories.