'All' Maguire had to do was put the finishing touches'. Is that not the point of my post, which you seem to have avoided/missed? Answer me this - had Brian Noble remained at Wigan last season would they have been as competitive? The evidence before us would indicate not.

Maguire added something that CLASS coaches have - the ability to, QUICKLY, squeeze every last ounce of ability out of every player, motivate them and develop a cohesion amongst the group that changes attitude.

Bennett may have taken 2 years to WIN anything but that's not what I said. I said top coaches change things quickly and start to make things happen. St George started to become far more competitive once he took over. Save for a poor final season Brisbane went the opposite way.

Read Wayne Bennett's book - 'Don't die with the music in you'. You'll read that his approach is all about combining technical knowledge and an approach that nurtures your players and that you have to CHANGE the way things are done and instil a winning culture and positive behaviours.

Bellamy is the same; albeit with a different approach and clearly Maguire has learnt from him. I understand that prior to Royce's appointment we were after the hottest young property on the NRL coaching scene in Shane Flanagan - someone revered as having a very bright future in the game for the same reasons.

As far as Anderson is concerned they rate him the same as, say, Shaun McRae - decent bloke but not having the sustainable ability of coaching at the highest level. You can get as defensive as you like about SL as opposed to the NRL but their comp and standards are way ahead of ours - that's why they consistently kick our ar$es. They produce better players and they produce better coaches. If they didn't then we'd stop clamouring to bring 'em over here wouldn't we.

The point in my post is that Royce's track record doesn't categorise him as either a top coach or a potential top coach and this is a view, rightly or wrongly, reinforced Down Under. In my opinion this is already beginning to become evident and which I feared would be the case when he came. It may be early, that point I'll concede, but he wasn't an appointment with the pedigree we SHOULD have been chasing.

We need a top coach. We do not have one. I actually do hope I am wrong.

After the ludicrous amount of time dedicated to bashing Potter last season, there is zero chance of SaintsFan admitting we look worse off without him.

Potter is a very good coach and did a sterling job with a decimated squad last season. I haven't seen or heard anything from Simmons that gives me any confidence in him whatsoever.

Spot on and exactly what I've been saying. Potter did a ok job with a injury hit team.

It look like the current team don't want to play for Royce.

That's pathetic even by your standards, FTV.

If we are playing as poorly as we are at present in Simmons' second season I will be equally as glad to see the back of him as I was of Potter. In my view that would mean we had experienced two poor coaches in succession. If Simmons turns out to be a bum appointment then that doesn't make Potter better; it just makes for two poor coaches!

And Potter was flush with resources when compared to Simmons. At least Potter had two functioning halfbacks for most of his two year stint with us. Simmons has yet to have a bloody week. AND Potter had Cunningham, our leader. Where is our leader this season? (Recruitment is the responsibility of the club, btw, not the coach)

Royce has got a better squad than potter had.

He appointed Two leaders. Not one. Two.

None of whom are leading thus far. One is probably too old and in the wrong position. The other is wrestling with a career choice.

Neither were good appointments in isolation let alone in tandem.

Meh, it's my view on it.

When Saints were working the way towards the GF with a weakened squad last season, it was nothing to do with Potter and only happening because the players were ignoring him. When we played badly, it was because Potter was clueless.

It is no surprise to me that the exact opposite appears to be the case this season; players losing games and Simmons winning them.

There was no evidence to suggest Simmons would make a good head coach, but ample evidence to suggest he wouldn't. A lot of people got their wish with Potter being replaced, time will tell if it was the right thing to do but at the moment we appear to be being coached by a dud. Not that I would expect the more vociferous anti-Potter posters to acknowledge it any time soon.

I was responding to your reference to me, as you well know. That was the pathetic bit. You're entitled to your view and I don't have to resort to sarcasm or silly put downs or whatever because I respect the fact that other people are entitled to their opinion. I don't agree with your opinion, either on Potter after two seasons or Simmons after five weeks, but you're entitled to it nonetheless.

You continue to make your childish comments about my opinion of Potter which was based upon a full season and a bit of his tenure and yet you think you are justified in writing off a coach after five fooking weeks? Hypocrisy.

Potter did an absolutely remarkable job as head coach of Catalans and got Saints to a GF twice. Simmons has a pretty disastrous head coach CV.

I've seen nothing to suggests that Simmons performance as a head coach at Saints will be any different to his other clubs. Unfortunately, the "anyone but Potter" approach taken by many last season may not have been in the club's best interests.

I desperately hope Simmons does a great job, I'm a Saints fan after all. I just don't think he is head coach material, more a "one of the boys" assistant coach. I could be completely and utterly wrong, but I fear I'm not.

And that was different from my point how exactly? I said that Maguire put the finishing touches to a team already poised on the brink. Noble took them as far as he could. Millward took us as far as he could. Anderson put the finishing touches to our team; Maguire to his. New coaches bring in a new dynamic. But Maguire had a far easier task than Simmons has. Far easier. All the materials were there for him, all primed and ready for the final finishing. He did that and kerching! Grand Final won. But then we are the perennial chokers at OT so I'm sure he was rubbing his hands with glee when he discovered it was us who were to be their opposition for the night!


However, so far as Anderson is concerned, clearly whatever was said by NRL pundits was a complete waste of time because he tweaked our team and took it to success of a kind we had not known in decades. Scuse me for mocking but if that's the wisdom coming out of the NRL these days, I'd rather not listen!


Oh, ok. Glad you've put your finger on it so astutely.


You state we don't have a top coach but then hope you are wrong. Cover all bases, why dontcha! I've no idea whether we have a top coach or not. I'm willing to give him considerably more time than five bloody weeks and a couple of months with half a fit/present team in training before even considering whether he could be a problem. Just the same as I did with Potter in fact.

He did indeed do a remarkable job at Catalans. They were new to Superleague and over two seasons I believe, he did a terrific job. No argument there. He'll quite likely do a great job at Bradford too. Know why? Because like Catalans they need hauling up as opposed to maintaining. The GF bit doesn't wash with me because we'd already been there three times, losing twice. Now. If we had WON the Grand Final, I may well have credited him something. But our team already knew what needed to be done to get there and there was Cunningham on board to show the way. Still couldn't win though. I won't go into Potter's personnel choices for the night. Oh, and we didn't make it to a Challenge Cup final during either of his years whereas we had made it to and won the three previously. Oh, and we played the most boring rugby ever for the last third of his first year. And we looked fat and unfit throughout the second season. But let's not remember those things, eh?


Well, he did take Penrith to a Grand Final. He was at Penrith a long time. Too long probably. He's also been under the tutilage of Sheens at Wests for seven years and assisted with the national team and an origin team. I don't see how that is any worse a CV than Maguire, for example? Simmons' time at Penrith and subsequent period as assistant to Sheens could have been the making of him for all we know.


In five weeks? Wow!! You have a crystal ball there?

Really? So he took a team that were, frankly, awful and had not achieved for as long as I can remember to the pinnacle of the game in one season and his job was far easier? Whereas Simmons inherited a team who had been to the last 5 GF's with a clutch of up and coming youngsters to fill the boots of those lost; and his job was 'harder'? Your logic is perplexing.

Any Wigan fan reading this would attest that, without Maguire's coaching Wigan would have continued to under achieve. Ergo, and my point, Maguire was the cause, the immediate improvement/success the effect. Simmons is 5 games in and we're going backwards.



You are deluded if you consider SL to be remotely on the same level as the NRL. Let me spell it out. This is an inferior comp. Average NRL coaches can look good over here. Anderson. Elliott. Millward. Potter. Matterson. McRae. Smith. They fail in the NRL.

Average NRL players can look like superstars over here. Because it's an easier comp. Most SL players can't succeed in the NRL because SL is an inferior comp. Thorman, Flanagan, etc. They are not good enough. If they were they'd stay out there and succeed. Few like Morley, Burgess and Ellis do. And in anticipation of the believist response, good on 'em.



For a second I suspected you may be capable of reasoned debate. Clearly not. My error.



Why is that covering all bases? One is my opinion one is aspirational. I hope I am because I'm a Saints fan. I want them to win, not fail. If my being wrong comes at the expense of Simmons turning out to be a super coach then I am happy to be wrong. But my opinion stands - he isn't and never will be. Not based on 5 games but on his zero track record and the opinions of those who know far more about the game than you or I ever will.

Good for you for giving him so long. You clearly haven't witnessed the pitiful displays thus far this season and borne witness to performances that at best can be described as ordinary. Your opinion is respected, just not agreed with.

My point entirely. Good coaches exert change quickly. Ours hasn't.

Oh and I'm now annoyed with you - if you're clever enough to be that succinct why didn't you do it earlier??