This is nothing new though. Its always gone on, not just at Saints but at every team. Its why we need a competitive league were no match is a walk over.

I suspect the increase in the league to 14 teams is one of the reasons for more none event matches. People forget that in the 12 team league we were often playing good sides 3 or 4 times a year. This meant more "big game" clashes.

Now we are playing teams just home and away, which exposes us to more poor opposition.



This then has the effect of the players switching off and taking the walkovers somewhat easily.



From a fatigue point of view there is also little pointing going 100% against weak opposition, especially if the following week a more challenging team faces Saints.

No I'm not. I don't think I've ever actually said we should get rid of Potter but I do believe I have said I would be quite happy to see him go if Saints produce the same awful stuff they produced for the final third of last season. As I understand it, and I think he vocalised it himself, the slower PTBs meant that Saints had to adapt their style from previous years. Potter appeared to answer that challenge with defensive moves, which IMO is a coaching cop out. It is easier to aim to stop other teams from scoring than to create moves to outwit them. However, such an approach results in deathly boring RL. If Potter turns out a revitalised attacking team this season then I'll be happy. However, if he simply produces more of the same then I will firmly join the Potter out camp, albeit it adapted to 'no contract extension for Potter'.





Not really. Saints were just as boring when all the first team were back from injury. They are seasoned players. While all good players should always be learning and growing, they were not developing in the way young players obviously are. I thought it ironic that the only player who stood out in the Grand Final was Eastmond. I just hope his flair hasn't been coached out of him by Potter in the off season but instead supported by inventive moves and the freedom to create opportunities.

Good grief, people are making Potter out to be some sort of rugby hating demon.

Hardly!



Given what happened to the team's style during the last third of the last season, it is perfectly feasible that Eastmond's spontaneity and flash could be reigned in by overly defensive rugby league. IMO it depends on (a) what approach Potter decides to take to the slower PTB etc this coming season, and (b) what kind of skills Potter has in his attack armoury. We haven't seen evidence of his ability to coach attack yet, other than about two moves, and so I think it is perfectly reasonable to wonder whether Potter's approach will snuff out Eastmond's flair. You clearly don't think that, but then I doubt you'd criticise Potter if he blew the place up! (And that's another example of hyperbole, just for the record)

he's had his first full off season with the lads, and knows them all, so lets just wait a bit eh?

Well, yes. I've said that [iif[/i the team produces the same stuff as last season this season [ithen[/i I'll be happy to see the back of him. If you read my posts you will see that is what I have been saying. This implies, surely, that I'm 'waiting a bit', doesn't it?

You've not seen any evidence of his ability to coach attack? Why are you ignoring his previous three years at Catalan when they were one of the most exciting teams to watch in the competition?



Did he coach the flair out of Bosc? Mogg? Greenshields?

i wasnt saying it at you directly, just my opinion on the topic

Read again. The context of my post was clearly in relation to Saints. Thanks.

Fairy snuff.

What people seem to be forgetting is that under Anderson we only had one move (the loop around with Pryce/Wellens) and in the past two seasons teams cottoned on to what we're doing. With Eastmond now in the centre of the pitch I'm sure we'll be one of the most exciting teams to watch in the competition. He's already better than Burrow.

So you're ignoring evidence that is contrary to your opinion?





If we're going to ignore a coaches previous work at other clubs, who are we going to replace him with? Mike Rush? Ian Millward?