Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:33 am  

SomersetSaint wrote:

Exactly, weary not be firing on all cylinders but we have been a gnats kipper from winning all of these games. Somerimes things just don't go for you, at the minute things are just not going saints way. Better now than on October.

Mmmmm gnats kipper,sounds inviting if we had come from 20 points behind and nearly plucked it by a gants whisker but to be up front and have other teams do a 'Saints' on Saints doesnt make it sound so never say die optimism we are poor no gettin away from it.Even if we had won we are still a poor outfit and this 'wait till October HOPEFULLNESS' IS ALL WELL AND NOBLE BUT WERE CACK

Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:34 am  

rafsanjhani wrote:

If you think Anderson was 'far' from the perfect coach (God knows what he would have needed to be to be perfect seeing as there are only so many trophies a team can win)and................now you are feeling 'unduly' positive about meeting a shockingly awful bradford team.What a strange juxtaposition wondering how much positivity you felt was 'undue' under our finest coach contratsed to your tongue in cheek optimism (you are being sardonic ,are'nt you?)

Nice use of the word finest.

As our most successful coach is Milward.


Anderson was not a poor coach, but neither was he our most successful.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:56 am  

I'm not happy with the tendancy of some Saints fans(same ones who would have supped lager out of his sweaty clog when Saints where at their pomp) who come out of the closet and deride Andersons achievments ,fans are very fickle .With fans like that who needs enemies?

Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:05 am  

rafsanjhani wrote:

I'm not happy with the tendancy of some Saints fans(same ones who would have supped lager out of his sweaty clog when Saints where at their pomp) who come out of the closet and deride Andersons achievments ,fans are very fickle

Don't worry, I'm certainly not contradicting myself. Whilst I'm surprised how many people agreed with me as he seems like the 'golden coach' to most Saints fans I have met, Iike I stated earlier in the thread I have never been a fan of his. This is a coach who was able to leave Nick Fozzard out as we had four props better than him for crying out loud, that squad would have won things with Cullen coaching them. Yet we played as if we had nothing outside of those props half of the time.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:19 am  

rafsanjhani wrote:

I'm not happy with the tendancy of some Saints fans(same ones who would have supped lager out of his sweaty clog when Saints where at their pomp) who come out of the closet and deride Andersons achievments ,fans are very fickle .With fans like that who needs enemies?

Perhaps it's you that thinks the fans are deriding his achievements. Most of the responses I read that are not that in favour of him returning appear to be more along the lines of putting a context around what he achieved so as to provide a more balanced viewpoint to the inevitable rose-tinted spectacles effect.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:52 pm  

Like him or otherwise Anderson achieved far far more than our last two coaches ever have. We had a top team yes,but he still sorted the defence out ( Averaged 14 pts against per match in his last season ?). In order to win matches you must have a dominate defence. Under Millward we had to score over 20pts per match, Now it's more like 30.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:15 pm  

I think Anderson was a very organised coach, and he could probably plan a victory on most days of the week. Consistency was his biggest asset both in terms of his approach and the player roster. When you are dominating sides you can play entertaining rugby and Anderson did have some entertaining Rugby. But saying he was a very good coach does not mean that we cannot say with the talents he had, winning the GF more than once should have been acheivable.

Anderson won in his first full year at Saints and so that helps with the reflections on his later seasons. The stability period was also welcome for some fans after a polarising period with Milward, who split fans of Saints, other clubs and even his own players.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:53 am  

Under millward saints were an often inconsistent side who always produced on the big stage.

Anderson then made saints a consistent team, who often (notice i say often, not always, before you get uppity) faltered on the big stage.

'But, but what about those challenge cups, and that grand final?''

Leeds was the only tough team saints met in a major final of that era. Every other team was pretty average, turned up and stunk the place out. A few of those challenge cup finals definitly spring to mind. Hull in 2006 were decent I guess.

The point is, since anderson took over, saints have started losing lots of finals when they play decent teams. In making them consistent, week in week out robots, he took away some of that spark that always helped them in the grand finals.

There was a time when saints were 5/5 in grand finals!.....and then leeds came along.

Potter took over, and just made saints a less consistent week in week out.

Simmons took over.....and appears to have made saints a little less consistent week in week out. The spark, declining gradually with each new appointment.

I have no idea why any saints fan would want anderson back. He won the title with an awesome team. Saints have nowhere near the personel they had then on the books now. Anderson would simply guide saints to higher regular placing again. Nothing more.

Saints next coaching appointment should be someone who will inject spark back into the way the team play. You can win the grand final from anyweher in the top 5 so week in week out consistency is not as much a necessity.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:27 pm  

Anderson was a fantastic defence coach undoubtedly. Didn't we lose 4 games all season by something silly like 1,2,3 and 4 points? I long for the days when we aren't conceding 20+ points a game but i think the game has moved on considerably from the last time DA was here. The attack is quicker, the talent is better and variety in attack is a must.

Likke McLennan said, his attack was absolutely dire relying on the flair of Pryce and Long to manufacture something from nothing. It would often be one play that teams could see a mile off, much that Briers round the back to the centre one that Warrington have been doing for countless amounts of years but people still occasionally fall for.

DA was outclassed in 2 Grand Finals by a Leeds side with more attacking flair and a better understanding of the conditions. His tactics were poor and we rightfully got beat.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:33 pm  

2008 First 10 games under Anderson

Saints 22 V 24 Hull KR
Saints 30 V 22 Warrington
Saints 22 V 16 Bradford
Saints 34 V 30 Wakefield
Saints 30 V 29 Hull
Saints 10 V 24 Cats
Saints 46 V 10 Wigan
Saints 26 V 28 Hudds
Saints 10 V 14 Leeds
Saints 24 V 30 Cas

Played 10, Won 5 Lost 5, Points conceded 227.

Hardly the mythically wonderful defensive side that people's history tinted spectacles are making out.

Anderson would do no better than Simmons with this side, and would certainly have done no better last year. There is a very good reason why he is unemployed.