Defensively? Big tick. Leeds caused us no problems at all during the game and every single point they scored came from stupid errors on our wingers' part.

Attack? That team is the most limited attacking team I've ever seen. We have almost the same players as last season yet it's been 3 months since we scored 18 points. A lot of people will blame Leon and Sean but there are no moves being put on, no one is running and there is no organisation. Our pack was absolutely magnificent tonight, Jammer and Tony P in particular were great. The yards were easy. How much did we spend camped in Leeds' 20 only to offer absolutely no threat. Was Mick Potter's masterplan really to mess about for 3 tackles, then throw the ball to Kyle Eastmond before putting in a pathetic kick on the last? (Our only threat)

The squad is no worse next season, perhaps slightly better. The talk of our 'rapid decline' is stupid. But is Mick Potter good enough to help us win a trophy? IMO with Millward coaching that side tonight we'd have won, same with the Cup semi final. We seem cluesless, despite having the same players as in previous seasons.

Ridiculously if we had two amateur wingers we'd have won 10-3 tonight. Those two HAVE to be replaced. It's happened too many times for it to be excusable.

The Leeds defence wasnt bad either

No one is taking that away from them.

What we require is someone who can put a good shoe in. Too many times, we found the winger, or the dead ball line. THAT is were Leeds won out tonight.

I think Potter is an excellent coach, problem is that I dont think Pryce has the creativity to cause problems, he is more of a support act that needs an organsier at the side of him.

Longy is still a fine player but lack the pace of old that terrified teams in the middle of the park.

Our pack tonight set the platform, unfortunately our backs didnt have the class or pace to cause problems, Eastmond excepted.

On the positive side i think the likes of Wheeler and Lomax next year will offer us more zip. I also think Gaskell in a year or two will be a dangerous attacking weapon.

The players (Pryce included), can only play the way Potter coaches and tells them to play. And in my opinion we have become a team who is ruled by set plays rather than the off the cuff stuff of a few years ago. Every team has set plays but you have got to be prepared to chuck the ball about a bit, try offloads etc as Leeds did when things weren't going right.
The only time we tried this was in the last 2 mins when the game was lost and we were passing the ball from wing to wing and trying everything. OK we never scored, but we seemed to be dragging the Leeds defence about a bit. Who knows if we had tried it a bit earlier what would have happened.
I'm not saying we should sack the coach or anything, as he has made us a well drilled outfit with superb defence, but seeing as we can't score more than 15 points in recent games (poor, for a team who thought nothing of sticking 50 or 60 on teams). Perhaps he should loosen the reigns of Pryce and a few others and let them get back to what they do best!!

I'd say that was spot on, with the exception of the comment about the defence, which was even better under Anderson IMO (certainly more consistently superb anyway).

I thought Potters game plan was spot on tonight.

The kicking game was working and kicking from dummy half was clever thinking but it was players mistakes tonight that cost us.

At 10-9 I thought the game was ours but that dropped ball by meli took the wind out of us.

Potter's game plan was like NRL circa 1996 - 5 drives, kick, play in their twenty and wait for them to make a mistake. The problem is that although we were very good at that in the first half, the bit that Potter's forgotten is that when you're in the opposition twenty with the ball - YOU STILL HAVE TO SCORE !

Out there, we have players who have been scoring for fun for years, who remain some of the most potent attacking forces in the game - Pryce, Roby, Gidley, Gilmour, Puletua. Yet for the last 4 months they've offered as much attacking threat as a pub side. When we get in the opponents' twenty we look clueless. There's little support, there are few angles being run, the moves end more often in cock-ups than in good final plays designed to regain possession. People say defence wins games - but sadly tonight showed that ain't true - attack wins games, because defence scores you no points.

Potter needs an attacking coach to put some threat back into Saints, because the last few months have been the most incompetent attacking display from Saints that I've seen in the last 13 years, and that's saying something. I don't care that the defence is great. Leeds offered plenty of opportunities for a decent attacking side to score tonight - they looked vulnerable, but we looked hopeless with ball in hand.

Maybe he borrowed Richard Agars coaching manual, but then again Agar admitted he doesn't have one.

You have done the easy bit in identfiying the problems, now name names. Which coaches/players should be replaced, and by whom ?

Bear in mind contractual obligations, salary cap restrictions and the financial position of the club.

Attack has been shocking in my opinion for a long time.

Kicking and attacking are things we need to work on, and quickly.

We have 1 set move, and no idea how to beat a defence, very worrying.

I said walking away, potter is the right man. when we have a new 7, with new ideas, we will move on to the next level. people know how to play Saints at the moment.. wait til next year

anderson gave a world class team to potter, started off hot, potter has tightened the already tight defance but in attack oh dear whats the point in having all these skillfull players if you wont let them play.

i have noticed some teams hireing defance coachs we need one for the attack