Competition - Link's top priority with the Wallabies

[Proud Pig]

I agree it is a bit of a juggling act but it is no point developing a game plan based around having a dominant scrum and set piece unless you have the players to execute it. The game plan has to suit the players available. There are infinite game plan combinations there are not infinite suitable and available player combinations. Obviously you can't just select the best player in each position and then structure a game plan around them. You could end up with no one in the side that can kick the ball to save their life. You need to select the best combination of players and then build the game plan around them.

As to whether form is Super Rugby form or previous Test form, the more important consideration is recent form. Is anyone seriously arguing that the Wallabies squad should not have been dominated this year by Brumbies and Reds players, except Dingo of course. They were the players with recent form instead players were selected on past performances like McCabe and the complete Waratahs squad. Picking form players does not preclude you from picking players from the weaker Super Rugby teams but the top super sides as a general rule should have greater representation than the weaker sides.

 

[Ruggo]

What Links first priority must be is getting his support staff selected and on the same page of what he is aiming at. Everything else must run second to this.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^^I concur.

I think one of Dingo's problems seemed to be the performance of his support staff.

We will probably never know the answer but how much say did he have in the appointment of his assistants, and how many of them were thrust upon him by ARU?

How much of his problems were linked to misplaced loyalties to his subordinate staff?
Parallels to his loyalty to Beiber at 10 this year.

When he first took over the show, he did not clean out the cupboard of assistants as many do. He just got on with the job of head coach with the limitation of using the existing support staff. Perhaps it was employment contract related and the ARU may not have had any money left to pay out Jim Williams et al. This is set against the fiscal backdrop of JON's CEO salary and a good Grange vintage for the ARU Boardroom cellar which seemed to take up most of the Head Count and contingency budget of the ARU.

One of the criticisms of him in GOAT's book was that he only sold himself for the Lord of The Darkness role, and didn't have any idea about assembling/promoting a "package" to coach The Darkness.

Totality Tony moving on of his own volition opens up an opportunity for Link that will not cost the ARU any extra money in terms of paying out contracts or severance monies.