Re: Daniel Anderson : Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:41 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

Boring winning > exciting losing > boring losing

As in the post above, that team was capable of exciting winning, maybe even better suited to it with some of the flair players in the squad. As Wayne Bennett would say, don't die with the music in you. Or as the Brian Smith coaching school would say, die with the ball in your hands, and kick on the 5th.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:46 am  

Smurf wrote:

No thanks. A monkey would have achieved the success he had with such a strong squad (VASTLY superior to any other team at the time) and a great coach would have achieved far more.

Incredibly overrated in my opinion, always thought so. He can improve a defence but he takes safety first percentage play to new level.

Whilst I think the monkey thing is OTT, I do agree that Anderson was far from the perfect coach and indeed the whole Brian Smith stable of coaches have similar flaws, i reckon he'd have us on a much steadier ship right now.

Let's see what Saturday brings. I'm almost over last friday and am starting to feel unduly positive again.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:24 pm  

No to Anderson. Yes to him coming to coach our defence but no to his attacking flair. Having one move in rugby league i.e. the loop around move, is no longer good enough. Look at Hull on Friday. They weren't mega but still had good ball control and more than one move in their playbook which gives them at least one more than Anderson had.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:38 pm  

You're assuming Anderson hasn't adapted his coaching style in the years since he has been gone. Millward used to hate the notion of defence yet Leigh defended well under him and Cas were showing signs of increasingly good defence prior to the tragedy which resulted in Millward taking time off.

The return of Daniel Anderson could be just what this rather mentally weak side needs.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:46 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

You're assuming Anderson hasn't adapted his coaching style in the years since he has been gone. Millward used to hate the notion of defence yet Leigh defended well under him and Cas were showing signs of increasingly good defence prior to the tragedy which resulted in Millward taking time off.

The return of Daniel Anderson could be just what this rather mentally weak side needs.

That all well and good but he isnt coming so we have to deal with what we have.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:50 am  

St pete wrote:

One things for sure, if he was in charge still he wouldn't have gone into the season without a experinced halfback and certainly wouldn't have signed a fullback to play halfback.

Whilst i agree with what you say about going in without an experienced halfback (it would help immensly right now if we had one) can i just mention,Pryce who wasnt a 6 ( Anderson would of had to agree his signing for the position ),Lockyer who started as full back,Widdop who started at full back, and im sure there are many other examples that prove starting at fullback doesnt rule you out of being a halfback.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:37 pm  

brook40 wrote:

Whilst i agree with what you say about going in without an experienced halfback (it would help immensly right now if we had one) can i just mention,Pryce who wasnt a 6 ( Anderson would of had to agree his signing for the position ),Lockyer who started as full back,Widdop who started at full back, and im sure there are many other examples that prove starting at fullback doesnt rule you out of being a halfback.

Aha, I see where you are going with this. Wellens started at half back before becoming a full back, you are suggesting him as the solution to our half back problem?

Re: Daniel Anderson : Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:47 pm  

I think we can reshuffle our deck all day long, in the end the team on the pitch is good enough, we've not been hammered, but they are hardly at full tilt of their capabilities either.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:59 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

I think we can reshuffle our deck all day long, in the end the team on the pitch is good enough, we've not been hammered, but they are hardly at full tilt of their capabilities either.

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.

Re: Daniel Anderson : Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:26 am  

Offside Monkey wrote:

Whilst I think the monkey thing is OTT, I do agree that Anderson was far from the perfect coach and indeed the whole Brian Smith stable of coaches have similar flaws, i reckon he'd have us on a much steadier ship right now.

Let's see what Saturday brings. I'm almost over last friday and am starting to feel unduly positive again.

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?)