I think Agar is favourite for the chop. He has been an absolute disaster since he took over at Hull. As a side, Hull last year looked like a team stuck in a timewharp of outdated British coaching tactics. I think its no coincidence that Hull have brought in an assistant coach from Australia. I suspect he is the stalking horse, there to takeover at the first opportunity.
Hulls squad this year looks very strong, so Agar can field no excuses for an underperforming side. If Hull continue to languish in the bottom half of the table, below Rovers, then he will definately be up for the knackers yard.


Dont know why odds are high on Potter going early.
I suspect that people have been reading the crap on these boards and have therefore put bets on that he will be out of the door mid season. There just isnt any logic to that from a financial point of view or from Saints angle.

To get rid of Potter mid season would result in a big payoff and Saints having no coach for the rest of the year.
If a coach is going to be let go, you let them go at the end of their contract to avoid a big payout. As Potters contract reputedly runs out at the end of 2010 then that would be the logical time to release him if Saints were unhappy with the sides progress.

For the final third of last season I was surrounded by people on the terraces who wanted to see the back of Potter. It isn't just some people who post on here who are unhappy with him. Aside from the team's deteriorating performances last season there is also the issue - from what I hear on the terraces I mean - of how 'unfriendly' Potter appears. He doesn't write a piece in the local rag like our previous couple of coaches, he talks about the team in the third person when interviewed, he gives the impression of not giving a damn about the club, that kind of thing. No doubting that Saints went downhill with the season and returning players appeared to make no difference to that trend. We also produced some of the most boring rugby seen at the club for years. And Potter is aloof, whatever his reasons may be. He doesn't appear to have made any attempts to reach the fans, which has perhaps become important to many fans because they enjoyed that kind of relationship with recent coaches.


No, there isn't, so it won't happen. I don't think it matters how badly Saints perform next season, Potter will see out his two year contract. It just won't be renewed if things don't improve.

potter wont be getting the boot from the saints as they will again be involved in all the comps at the shake up time
a 4th consecutive gf on the trot?
Agar will be the first coach to go imo

Potter won't get the boot because Saints will win SL this year.

Oh no, what will Saints do? I hear he kicks his dog too!



Shock, how has he lasted this long??? If you call it a rag, why sould someone not even from the town rate it highly?



So because he doesn't seem as emotionally involved as you and the ts you stand with he should be sacked? Or am I reading this wrong?



Which players appeared to make no difference?



Yet reached the Challenge Cup Semi and Grand Final



Why should he? all you do is slate him



Yeah, I'd much rather have a relationship with a coach than let him run the team how he sees fit and allow himself some kind of private life, no really!

Alright Mick,any chance of being entertained this year. Hope you dont take offence.

Not really Don, but we've had exactly the same on the Leeds board about Tony Smith, and look what he achieved. Funny how it only matters that he doesn't engage with the fans when the team isn't doing as well isn't it?

Saints fans need to realise that you're coming to the end of a golden era given then players you had and brought in. I suspect the same will happen to Leeds too in a few years time, thats sport, and thats why we watch it.

The Saints board realised it and brought in who they felt was the best man to re-build the side. Those who say he doesn't like his teams to play an entertaining brand of football need to look back at the styles of play Catalans go with after his tenure.

You're talking to a brick wall mate.

Read my post again, this time perhaps putting your usual bile aside.

Firstly, I was reporting what people on the terraces [iaround[/i me say, not those I stand with on the terraces and not me. I used scare quotes around the word 'unfriendly' (I've done it again: do you know what the presence of scare quotes means?).

I don't think much of what Saints became last season and in that I think you will find I am not in the minority. Potter is the coach. Therefore, the buck stops with Potter when it comes to the team's performance. Had he taken us to a second treble there would be no problem with the buck stopping with Potter, would there? Likewise when the team deteriorates. I spread my praise and my criticism in equal measure. I criticise Potter for killing our attack and turning us into a boring team to watch.

Incidentally, I think at one time we had 11 players out injured all at once and people were struggling to remember how long it had been since we had experienced so many injuries in one go. Therefore, a deterioration in performance was almost inevitable at that point given the inexperience of the lads who were called on to play as well as those with more minor injuries who played through them. However, even with the whole first team back again, our attack was just as dull and our performances were just as boring, and of course we managed to lose in the semi-final of the Challenge Cup, the Grand Final and come second in the league. So to be fair to Potter he did achieve one thing he said he would do when he first turned up: he got Saints off the silverware treadmill.

And no, I am not asking for Potter to be 'emotionally involved' with the fans. That is a seriously stupid suggestion. Writing a weekly column in the local rag (and I use the word 'rag' in a generic sense, not a derogatory one) is hardly emotional involvement. It just shows a bit of interest in the people of a town which has been rugby league mad for over a century (granted, not as rugby league mad as it once was but Saints are still a presence here). I think both Millward and Anderson understood the culture of St Helens. Potter gives the impression of not being interested in that. But hey, who cares? He'll be gone at the end of next season (with a bit of luck if the team perform like they did in the final third of last season).

I think you'll find my criticism of Potter has been simply that under him we have become the most boring RL team in the league. That we didn't win any silverware was no shock to me and had we won, say, the Grand Final (which we might have done had Meli not managed to find his visa application) but done so while playing the most boring rugby league in the entire RL universe (as we were doing), I would still have criticised Potter for turning us into the most boring rugby league team in the whole RL galaxy.

I put a bet on him last year to go at 15-1 and lost £25. The lucky b*stard!




I'm not wasting money on him again. The bratfud fans and board seem to prepared to put up with anything and surely they can't be any worse than last year.

I couldnt give a flying one about Potters personality or lack of one.
What I will have a say on, wether you like It or not. Is paying good money to be bored rigid.
I can handle not winning trophys,the majority of time Ive watched Saints we havent won zilch. But last season we were incredibly boring to watch,despite haveing a team full of players most other clubs would love to have.
I dont get why we have to be dull as ditchwater why we rebuild but still have some of the best players that super league has to offer.

Nothing quite like over exaggeration to make a point worth ignoring.

Had Potter won the GF given the injury problems of 2009, he would have done a magnificent job. As it happens, he very nearly did.

You seem to forget the chokefest of Anderson's first season, I for one am happy to give him another year and I think people will be pleasantly surprised at 2010.

Did you ever discover if we'd become as incredibly undisciplined under Potter compared to Anderson's reign as you asserted at the beginning of the season on Redvee? But you preferred to wait until the end of the year to make your judgement because averages were of no use?

A lot of the arguments you are now putting down to your mates and fans standing round you, you were stating were your own at one time. Why the change?

Well, quite. Despite the injuries we got to the Grand Final but thanks to Meli we didn't win it. I wasn't blaming Potter for not winning the Grand Final. I was blaming Meli (who, until that point, had been surprising many of us by being one of our standout players for some weeks, an observation I was very happy to make myself at the time).

The injuries stopped being an excuse for the awful rugby played by Saints the minute all the injured were back on the pitch, which I think was by the time of the Challenge Cup semi, bar Longy if I remember right (which isn't guaranteed). Obviously I don't include Cayless in that statement but he was hardly seen when we won silverware so his absence can't be taken as a factor for last season's performance.

PS: I was clearly using exaggerated language in my previous post. There is a technical term for that. It's called hyperbole.

Billinge Lump, I haven't a bloody clue what you are wittering on about.

Unsurprising.

I love all this talk of boring rugby under Potter.

Until Leeds demolition of a walking corpse in the shape of Celtic Crusaders, Saints had scored more trys than any other SL team. So if we are boring what does that say about the other SL sides?

The team Potter has in terms of backs is the one that Anderson built, Anderson built his backs around size and power. Sides have to play to their strengths, and there is no point flinging the ball out wide in your own half if your team doesnt have the threequarters to exploit such play through pace.
This is something Saints lack. Until the lack of pace in the fullback, centres, and wings is addressed, Saints will appear boring to many fans. We will continue to have to play a power orientated game, that relies on big forwards setting up field position close to the opposition line, followed by excellently executed moves.
The main weakness of this approach is the one we all know from when the Bulls used, it. NO PLAN B. Having a side built on size and power almost guarantees you will be in the cut for the big games, but it also tends to leave you short of alternatives if the opposition raises its game in a big match. This is why Leeds keep doing us, and why Hudds defeated us this year in the cup.

Hopefully Potters development of the kids,(his primary task when recruited by Saints) will benefit us in the years to come, as many of these kids do possess pace. This should allow us then to vary our game, as Leeds have shown themselves capable of doing, eg mixing it up the middle or getting it wide and using pace.

You see this Is the exact mindset I dont get.
Because we didnt just struggle against teams that could raise their game on the day ala Leeds and Hudds as youve mentioned.
We strugled against an injury hit Crusaders who were out on their feet for the last 25 mins and we still didnt put a move on em.
It was mind numbingly boring against Salford at home,again no moves. In fact numerous home games last year Id given up watching and was chatting away to people around who had done the same.
Christ we didnt even have an offload game at times never mind flinging It out to the wings.
Ill agree that Potter was appointed with an eye on the development of the kids. I just hope he isnt developing them in a way that makes me stay home and watch the paint dry instead.

True. You never can string a coherent sentence together.

Good, because if he continues this coming season what he started during the last, you'll get an awful lot more of it!

Seeing as you said that you had gained some qualifications in coaching surely you can see the benefit in not changing coaches every year which is more or less what you're inferring by writing off Potter. I expect such flippant knee-jerk reactions from the less level-headed and emotionally stable, however from somebody who I perceive has an insight into developing players and playing style I think we're entitled to expect a bit more grace.

Not really.

Continuity comes from assistants and backroom
staff at many clubs. An average three year turnover of head coach is
not uncommon.

Potter is just not right for Saints.

He has some virtues but does not fit the
Saints ethos and more importantly does
not seem to be making any effort to
engage with the town.

If he goes then the whole backroom and the associated
youth policy will remain.

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)