Some worrying signs, some signs that he won't change things much.

I think Harry will suffer from the fact that we have zero pace anywhere in the team, which means we have to dominate games to win them. With quite a few sides having superior packs to ours, it's going to be a hellish slog.

The general rubbishness of the rest of the teams (Leeds aside) means 2nd is still a strong possibility.

well hull kr beat us at home..first time in 24 years..hmmmmmm
havent made my mind up about him yet.???

Not sure yet. I'll tell you in 5 or 6 games time.

IIRC we got beat at Hull KR in a season opener a couple of years ago and Harlequins RL at home with better sides on the pitch than what we had on Friday i.e. no Pryce.

I think anyone who was at the Huddersfield game would recognise the work he's got doing on the defensive side of the ball is first rate. We conceded just one line break in the opening two games which is a great start.

You can't jump to conclusions either way after three games, however the original poster knows that. They're just trying to get us rattled because we lost a game and the usual comedy characters will come out panicking.

It was a genuine inquiry. Yes 3 games is too early for conclusions but there would be some general impressions and the question really was

Had there been any drastic changes in style noticed ??????

Who are you trying to kid? You're trying to rattle us with a cheap shot and I won't allow that.

OK......

Most coaches although unhappy with defeat would not be overly concerned that a HKR side scored two tries out of three from kicks and it was discipline early in the season that lost you the game in the end.

Taking nothing away from my side you cannot in any shape or form look to the coach for this loss, he has some big players out the 17 and as with any top of the table team there is only one way you can ultimately go and thats down, keeping a steady side has always worked for Saints and to expect any different after a few games in charge would be silly.

All coaches should be given at least 12-18mths when they first arrive, instant success is always a good way to be a yo-yo side, build it slowly and success will come!

As McClennan says it's far too early to judge his full impact yet. The summer months are normally the time we hit our peak, so it'll be interesting to see how we do then. I think we can only fully judge him after a season.

But, I have noticed two things since his arrival, one a positive, the other a negative. The positive is our defence looks better than ever. Once again on Friday we conceded most of the tries from kicks (two of them), the other was a good short ball to Galea. I've been very impressed defensively so far, we look really solid throughout. The negative is our discipline. Last year we didn't give alot of penalties away so it's a bit strange seeing us give so many away. The problem is, I don't think Potter is greatly concerned as Catalans were the worst in the comp. I just hope it doesn't cost us in a big game.

Cheers

looking forward to watching a full game.

I have noticed a propensity to concede penalties around the ruck, which is i suspect because the defence is being more agressive in this part of the field

Potter was big on the wrestling at Catalans wasnt he?
Guess he has brought that over with him

Our penalty count under Anderson was pretty high in his first season with us. It took us a season for us to bring this down, which we did year on year.

The difference being, when Anderson came we didn't have very good discipline, were as Potter already had a disciplined side.

Must say the discipline issue concerns me. Concede a penalty and at best you lose ground and end up on a back foot and defending which is tiring. Or get points stacked up against you with kicks over the post as happened on Friday. An ill disciplined side irritates referees whether we like them or not. Though admittedly we don't seem to have to do much to irritate Smith.

As Chairmaker has stated, most of the penalties appear to be coming from the ruck, we may just be pushing the seemingly new ruling on the amount of wrestling allowed at the ruck.



We went from 150 penalties in 2005 to 211 in 2006, Andersons first full season, so that's incorrect.

Not true. We conceded 150 penalties in 2005 and 211 in 2006 (Anderson's first full season). The 2005 total was lower than both 2007 and 2008. In addition our totals for 2003 and 2004 were both lower than all of Anderson's three full seasons.

It could be a difficult season for Saints this year, some experienced personnel have left and we are relying on youngsters to fill their boots.

Our strength in the Super League era has been largely built on having strength in depth but we could be exposed this year, for a large part of Friday's game we had four youngsters on the pitch who have only played a handful of games, most of them as subs.

This is not Potters fault, he has to make the best of it, but it could reflect badly on him as the season goes on.


Just one thing from Friday, I know Roby started as stand off, when KC went off and he went to hooker I'd like to have seen Wheeler given a run there. He came on to cover Gidley at centre and then got left there.

It was known from early on in the week that Pryce was going to be missing so they must have done some training with another pair of half backs.
I think Potter, like a lot of modern coaches, works on the principle that as long as you've got thirteen guys on the pitch they have to get on with it.

I'm a bit of a traditionalist I like to see players in the right roles

I stand corrected. It must have just seemed like we gave away more penalties.

i think its a bit harsh to critisize potter after only 3 games, imo we have had a gd start, fair enough to lost to hkr but who cares, we lost to them in the opening match last year by about 2 points if i remember, we have beat warrington which can sometimes be dodgy and beat hudds away which is always dodgy, you gotta look at the fact that catalans were the worst team disicpline wise last year and potter has obviously brought some of that over but give it time, its always hard for a new coach. good start for us if you ask me considering we only have done the 1 signing and lost a whole bunch of players

We have played about 40 to 50 minutes of decent rugby out of a possible 240 so yes it is a bit concerning at the moment. That said, the defence looks very good.

Thing is, though, he's not here to 'make the best of it', is he? The reason he's here is to develop the youngsters so we could be seeing a lot more of them if he takes his remit seriously. I think the injuries may only be incidental this season. He will want to battle harden the young players and it's likely we'll suffer more defeats as a result.

Though, to be fair, on Friday it wasn't the young players who were the problem. It was after all Graham who gave away our final penalty which gave Hull KR the match. Ok, so if Wheeler hadn't turned in then there was a remote possibility of a try from Armstrong at the end but without Graham's penalty gift we wouldn't have been in a last minute position. And Graham wasn't the only experienced player giving away penalties.

Our lack of discipline anywhere around the ball cost us on Friday night. That may be ok as a one-off but if it becomes a pattern then the coach does have something to do with it.

yeah but you were crap for the first 3rd of last year then you woke up as a squad and looked pretty awesome

Eastmond was apparently down for playing on Friday but it was reported that he had picked up an injury to his knee in training on Thursday.

How very dare you, we are awesomeness personified for every game of Andersons reign as coach. We only lost the 2 Grand Finals because we were cheated by God, how dare he make it rain to suit Leeds.