Australian Rugby / RA

[RedsHappy]

Re the Larkham 'sacking'...

It’s laughable - by any standard more a satiric charade than serious, insightful decision-making.

4 years together and just now MC and SL work out that their attacking philosophies are ‘incompatible’ - they’re obviously very slow communicators.

Larkham was the ‘anointed successor’ only a year ago (btw this was in and of itself ridiculous and a poor reflection on RA and MC), FFS. How in just one recent year from four together do we credibly go from that to this?

Then of course in the ‘financially distressed’ RA a major face-saving role is still found for him - perhaps the Brumbies mafia rumours of so many years are real.

Grey, the new forwards coach and Byrne have even more to answer for if you look at the chronic non-improvements and degradations in their areas - yet they remain totally untouched, we have no idea why on objective grounds.

Cheika of course remains the man for the job despite a terrible, sustained w-l ratio and further clear declines in Wallaby results in the year just gone and the humiliating loss of two sequential 3 Test home series to England and Ireland.

Yet RA sees absolutely no need to explain to the rugby public why Cheika remains re-appointed as HC

I’m still awaiting one genuinely insightful statement from Castle and/or a single policy initiative that confirms she knows what she’s doing in any important respect - one year on.

And note what Commissioner Hayne has to say about the culture and deep arrogance at the NAB so recently headed up by C Clyne? Utterly condemning and searing re even the most senior officers. Anything relevant to Clyne's leadership formulae at RA?

 

[Strewthcobber]

That's the thing. I firmly believe we should not be tossing Larkham, but parachuting into WB HC after the RWC is too much, undeserved, inappropriate and extending the impression the old boys network further. He needs to find a way back to pro club rugby and very much preferably here in Australia. Take his recent WB experience with him to build more complete approaches into franchise rugby. Then show what he can do with it.

I reckon he needs to go OS and get exposed to some of the thinking in the NH. They (well some of them) are starting to lead a lot of rugby's innovation up there and our coaches are way behind.

 

[Joe Blow]

Does not bode well for Cheika working with/under Johnson.

 

[Rugby Central]

I reckon he needs to go OS and get exposed to some of the thinking in the NH. They (well some of them) are starting to lead a lot of rugby's innovation up there and our coaches are way behind.

The NH innovation comes from being a far more open shop than here. Also, the owners of the clubs don't tolerate excuses, so what you get is talented and ACCOUNTABLE coaching. While not being privy to the full coaching set up across Australia it seems a remarkable coincidence that the defence coach, forwards coach and head of athletic preparation (just resigned) all played for Manly.

I'm not suggesting anything regarding the quality or competence of any coach. It's more a matter of how wide are they casting the recruitment net when 3 of the positions in the RA coaching set up come from a single Shute Shield Club where they all played in the early to mid-90's. I get the connections back in the days of amateurism but with an entire world of coaches to recruit from?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Not sure what the issue is RC. With Cheika there too you have north and south of the city covered

 

[John S]

Not sure what the issue is RC. With Cheika there too you have north and south of the city covered

And of course, nothing from the other side of South Dowling Street.

 

[The Honey Badger]

The NH innovation comes from being a far more open shop than here. Also, the owners of the clubs don't tolerate excuses, so what you get is talented and ACCOUNTABLE coaching. While not being privy to the full coaching set up across Australia it seems a remarkable coincidence that the defence coach, forwards coach and head of athletic preparation (just resigned) all played for Manly.

I'm not suggesting anything regarding the quality or competence of any coach. It's more a matter of how wide are they casting the recruitment net when 3 of the positions in the RA coaching set up come from a single Shute Shield Club where they all played in the early to mid-90's. I get the connections back in the days of amateurism but with an entire world of coaches to recruit from?

And silly me. I thought all the power and control rested with Uni.

 

[Derpus]

The NH innovation comes from being a far more open shop than here. Also, the owners of the clubs don't tolerate excuses, so what you get is talented and ACCOUNTABLE coaching. While not being privy to the full coaching set up across Australia it seems a remarkable coincidence that the defence coach, forwards coach and head of athletic preparation (just resigned) all played for Manly.

I'm not suggesting anything regarding the quality or competence of any coach. It's more a matter of how wide are they casting the recruitment net when 3 of the positions in the RA coaching set up come from a single Shute Shield Club where they all played in the early to mid-90's. I get the connections back in the days of amateurism but with an entire world of coaches to recruit from?

I'm pretty sure they initially took an Australians only stance following Deans.

Considering the few coaching pathways that exist in Australia involve x number of years of volunteering im surprised we had 3 coaches to hire.

Less surprised that two of them are ex-wallabies that can't coach, mind.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

What I really have to give credit to RA for is finding roles for coaches removed as reality is we don't have a production line of top level coaches so sensible to find other roles for coaches who are not successful as top coaches.

Stephen Larkham still young aa a coach I know he has his critics but I certainly see plenty of room for growth and improvement from him given how long he has been coaching.

 

[Braveheart81]

Surely they've just created this role for Larkham because he's on contract for the rest of the year and they have to pay him anyway.

Presumably this means they can a) still get some value out of him and b) there's potential that he leaves early by choice because he finds a new role and they can stop paying him.

You'd have to think his best option is to seek a European gig when their new season commences in August or whenever it is.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Yeh had not thought about that - but equally astuate commericial decision as may as get value rather than have to pay him out. Larrkham of course could have refused the role and forced his hand but equally probably easier to get another job being in a job.

He also has a family to feed so bird in the hand always better I guess.

 

[Ignoto]

Stephen Larkham still young aa a coach I know he has his critics but I certainly see plenty of room for growth and improvement from him given how long he has been coaching.

Sure, just that room for growth and improvement should be away from the national team. Similar to the Richard Graham appointment to the Reds, the Fans all knew Larkham needed more time and experience to develop his coaching credentials. By being a little too eager, he's more than likely stunted his chance of taking the reigns until the 2023 WC.

 

[Quick Hands]

4 years together and just now MC and SL work out that their attacking philosophies are ‘incompatible’ - they’re obviously very slow communicators.

Larkham was the ‘anointed successor’ only a year ago (btw this was in and of itself ridiculous and a poor reflection on RA and MC), FFS. How in just one recent year from four together do we credibly go from that to this?

If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.

Re the Larkham 'sacking'.



Grey, the new forwards coach and Byrne have even more to answer for if you look at the chronic non-improvements and degradations in their areas - yet they remain totally untouched, we have no idea why on objective grounds.

To lose one assistant might be regarded as a misfortune, to lose two looks like carelessness. (Apologies to Oscar Wilde, but he could well have written this whole farcical saga)

Re the Larkham 'sacking'.


And note what Commissioner Hayne has to say about the culture and deep arrogance at the NAB so recently headed up by C Clyne? Utterly condemning and searing re even the most senior officers. Anything relevant to Clyne's leadership formulae at RA?

Funny how RA, NSWRU, QRU et al have a similar management culture to the big four banks, just ask Western Force supporters who felt the 12 inches of cold steel amidst allegations of dodgy transactions, hidden payments etc.

 

[Quick Hands]

Larkham camp getting the "I wasn't allowed to coach the team" rumours out there

Would be much more convincing if he'd resigned instead of shuffled onto the next high paying unaccountable gig.

How long has he been doing nothing but photoshoots and collecting a paycheck?

(Obviously Cheiks isn't exactly being held to account either)

It only took him 4 years to work out that he and Cheika held different philosophies? Really?

 

[Quick Hands]

Dudded?

Given an opportunity, underperformed,parachuted into another high paying role without any real performance measures.

Can someone dud me please.

Nobody inside the inner sanctum of rugby ever gets dudded. The worst they get is a golden parachute or a sinecure like this.

 

[RedsHappy]

Surely they've just created this role for Larkham because he's on contract for the rest of the year and they have to pay him anyway.

Presumably this means they can a) still get some value out of him and b) there's potential that he leaves early by choice because he finds a new role and they can stop paying him.

You'd have to think his best option is to seek a European gig when their new season commences in August or whenever it is.

Maybe to your first 2 paras above but what about the clear need to get some sort of sustained, overt and objective performance-based culture (vs a kind of mates-driven and fellow-travellers culture) into the core institutions of Australian rugby?

Larkham was a failure as HC with the Brumbies post-White and was certainly a dismal failure there as anything objectively resembling an 'attack' coach.

He has been a dismal failure as Attack Coach at the Wallabies.

Alternatively he has been the greatest long-standing and indulged teachers' pet there has been in recent Australian rugby history irrespective of hard results achieved. With consistently poor to mediocre results he was publicly 'anointed' in 2018 to succeed MC as HC of the Wallabies on zero objective evidence that he had earned the position in any manner whatsoever - can you bear it!? Laughable in any other code.

Properly sacking people for consistent, measurable under-performance in management and coaching has been lamentably absent within the halls of Australian rugby's elite bodies. Often soft options are found or contract extensions granted or new hiding places designed for the failed person - especially if nominated as a 'good rugby man'.

Providing an ego-saving soft option for Larkham sends signals that nothing has really changed. Sacking him would likely equal the same cost as holding him more or less but sacking him properly for years of measurable underperformance as coach would send the appropriate signals to all pro coaches in Australian rugby - develop yourself and perform or there's no hiding place for you and this is exactly how it is in all the best-run pro sporting codes.

 

[RedsHappy]

If it wasn't so serious it would be funny.



To lose one assistant might be regarded as a misfortune, to lose two looks like carelessness. (Apologies to Oscar Wilde, but he could well have written this whole farcical saga)



Funny how RA, NSWRU, QRU et al have a similar management culture to the big four banks, just ask Western Force supporters who felt the 12 inches of cold steel amidst allegations of dodgy transactions, hidden payments etc.

Yes and closely note how these Aust rugby elite bodies have been near-obsessed with getting 'prestigious' ex-senior bankers or financiers to head their boards as Chairmen. Correlations with observable outcomes anyone?

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Maybe to your first 2 paras above but what about the clear need to get some sort of sustained, overt and objective performance-based culture (vs a kind of mates-driven and fellow-travellers culture) into the core institutions of Australian rugby?



Larkham was a failure as HC with the Brumbies post-White and was certainly a dismal failure there as anything objectively resembling an 'attack' coach.



He has been a dismal failure as Attack Coach at the Wallabies.



Alternatively he has been the greatest long-standing and indulged teachers' pet there has been in recent Australian rugby history irrespective of hard results achieved. With consistently poor to mediocre results he was publicly 'anointed' in 2018 to succeed MC as HC of the Wallabies on zero objective evidence that he had earned the position in any manner whatsoever - can you bear it!? Laughable in any other code.



Properly sacking people for consistent, measurable under-performance in management and coaching has been lamentably absent within the halls of Australian rugby's elite bodies. Often soft options are found or contract extensions granted or new hiding places designed for the failed person - especially if nominated as a 'good rugby man'.



Providing an ego-saving soft option for Larkham sends signals that nothing has really changed. Sacking him would likely equal the same cost as holding him more or less but sacking him properly for years of measurable underperformance as coach would send the appropriate signals to all pro coaches in Australian rugby - develop yourself and perform or there's no hiding place for you and this is exactly how it is in all the best-run pro sporting codes.

I certainly agree right decision to remove Larkham as attack coach for Wallabies but I don't personally agree Larkham was an abysmal failure as Brumbies coach and thought he was tracking okay as a rookie coach and perhaps feel you are being a little harsh there. Yes perhaps agree with you that might have been better to stay longer at the brumbies as part of his apprenticeship...but with lure of taking over from Cheika certainly can see why Larkham took the role.

How much of the blame lies with Larkham vs Cheika I am not really sure but yes at least Cheika will be running out of excuses if the next attack coach appointed and attack still falters.

 

[Slim 293]

Yeah, most coaches wouldn't be deemed a failure if they made the finals every year, including the top four in their first two seasons............

Having said that, under Bernie as head coach the Brumbies were coasting off the back of the work Jake White did and for being an attack specialist the Brumbies definitely regressed in that department turning somewhat surprisingly into a largely forwards dominant team, relying on driving mauls to get over the line.

And his work with the Wallabies was certainly dated and the results have been poor, and on his performance there's certainly nothing shocking about his sacking..........

Buuuuuut RA being RA they've actually managed to turn him into a scape goat following last year's performance review by not actually sacking him based on his performance, but rather his fallout with Cheika when he was reportedly "attack coach" in name only and hardly worked directly with the team........ and yet the the forwards and defence coaches don't have anything to answer for.......... truly bonkers stuff.

Meanwhile, our opponents are laughing at us...........

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...mouse-counterpart-cheika-20190205-p50vp9.html

 

[Strewthcobber]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...control-of-wallabies-as-stephen-larkham-exits

Interesting article from Bret Harris - though I'm not sure I buy all of it.

But Cheika misjudged his man. It’s not that Larkham was a bad coach, but just the wrong coach for this particular Wallabies team, or at least, certain key players.......

The team’s attack was singled out as the problem after the Wallabies averaged just 19.2 points a game.
But Larkham was not a sacrificial lamb to appease the growing numbers of disillusioned Australian rugby fans. This was Cheika seizing back control of the direction of the Wallabies.......

Time and again the Wallabies’ attack broke down, more often than not behind the advantage line, after a series of complicated handling manoeuvres went wrong. There was nothing wrong with the moves per se, but they did not suit the personnel. It just didn’t click. It was akin to trying to force square objects into round holes.