Quote ="The Chief"It may only be four disastrous performances but Potter wasn't given that long before the "your fired" finger was twitching under the desk. '"
Potter was coming off the back of Anderson's reign - a coach who was loved and respected by pretty much every saints fan (and who seemed to add steel to Saints' defence whilst keeping much of attacking flair that Millward had brought)
It was soon apparent that the playing style coached by Potter was one of safety-first, one-out rugby and the contrast from what had come before was as stark as it was disappointing.
In Simmons' first season, we seemed to play a bit more of an adventurous game (albeit not in the same class as the Millward era, or even under Anderson). The inevitable favourable comparison to Potter's style was always going to buy Simmons time. That we reached the GF with the injury/unprofessionalism issues surrounding key players and had to blood a lot of youngsters was recognised as a major achievement amongst fans.
This season is an entirely different story. We struggled to beat London (but then, it was first game up and London were being quietly tipped as potential dark horses); we were embarassed by Salford for 40 mins and although ultimately won comfortably, were lucky to get our noses back in front (but that was passed off as nerves in our first game at LP). Since then, it's been mainly awful. Just shows how much of an influence Jammer had on the team (and invites the question: how much could we have achieved with him in the side if we'd have had better coaches 2009/10/11?)
But that aside, Simmons has been an improvement on Potter - especially as Potter took a great team that had been the dominant SL team under Anderson (notwithstanding the Leeds GF defeats) and turned them into also-rans.
Quote ="The Chief"The issue for Saints is that they have based their style of play around a quick PTB and short passes around the ruck. As soon as a referee allows a team to slow Saints PTB by just 1 or 2 seconds (as Hull did last night), then we don't seem to have a plan B.'"
Was it back in 2008 when SL/the RFL regressed from a more open game where any hint of slowing the PTB was penalised, back to the more turgid arm-wrestle type rugby, dominated by bulk and power?
I don't think Saints have ever really come to terms with the change, after using the quick PTB to such lethal effect for so long. To be fair to Potter, he at least tried to change the Saints style of play. The *only* two flaws in his plan were that it was a snoozefest to watch, and didn't even bring success.
As someone has said earlier, it would be knee-jerk to sack Simmons now and, all things considered (including the financial cost and lack of availability of a top-class replacement), it's odds-on that he's here until the end of the season. EMcM needs to spend between now and the end of the year finding a top level coach who not only can make these players fulfill their potential, but have saints playing to the expansive style we were famous for. If it costs us more, then so be it - the past 4 seasons (including this one) have demonstrated that even with top players, you need a top coach to deliver success.
In the meantime, Simmons needs to be more open to advice, and be man enough to admit his plans haven't worked and need to be rethought.
The idea of rotating players, in order to keep players fresh for the end of season play-offs and generate competition for places, is a sound one in theory. In practice, we're struggling for form, confidence and understanding between players. We need a period of stability to build bonding between the team.
The halfback pairing of Lomax and Gaskell showed flashes of brilliance last season and suggested it could, in time, be the best and most natural saints halfback couple since Longy & Tommy. Perhaps if we still had KC, Jammer & Scully on the field to marshall the team, Lomax & Gaskell could just concenytrate on their own game and understanding and grow into the roles even more. But we've had a lot of changes in the off-season, and lost our onfield leader/talisman. They're both talented, but not experienced enough to boss the team around at this stage in their careers. I also think that after their showing last season, when they were unknown quanities, opposition coaches will have done their homework on them both and better prepare to nullify them. It's time to give Lance a go at halfback - IMO preferably at scrumhalf. He may not turn out to be the answer, but he was heralded as a halfback signing and has the experience to boss a team round the park. Lomax has the versatility to be the bench back or even back Robes up or, even though I'd like to see Makinson get a run there, start at fullback.
The pack is also a problem. It seems lightweight and flimsy. Simmons needs to recognise what strengths it does have. Start off with the heaviest options to load-up. Pack the midfield and play a territorial game for the first quarter. Then bring the faster forwards on to take advantage of the cut in interchanges (which will come more into play when the weather warms up and when (if!) the ground gets drier). He needs to be smarter with his subs.
We're stuck with Simmons and the playing staff for the rest of the season - but it needs not be the write-off that some think is inevitable.
