Dictatorial vs Inclusive coaching

[Gagger]

First, you'll need to read the article that I link to below.

WARNING - Do not have any liquids in your mouth whilst reading it - I almost buggered my new laptop

The core tenet of the article is that Robbie Deans is in fact a choice coach because ignoring your assistant coaches isn't a bad thing after all because:

"You don't need to have a cabal of coaches to achieve clarity of method for a team. A smart and dictatorial head coach can do this, too. Does anyone know who Vince Lombardi's assistant coaches were? What about Craig Bellamy's, Des Hasler's or Wayne Bennett's? The most successful Wallabies coach, with a 76 per cent winning record, was Rod Macqueen. Who were his assistants? Macqueen was a one-man band."​

​

​

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/democratic-or-dictatorial-best-coaching-system-is-a-winning-system-20121012-27i9p.html#ixzz29BB9dchO​

If I'm not mistaken, Rod McQueen had assistants which included Tim Lane and Jeff Miller for the 99 RWC and some guy called Ewen McKenzie later on. He was and is known as a manager rather than a coach.

I also remember Jake White famously handing over his back line to Eddie Jones during their RWC win, and if you read Clive Woodwards autobiography, he also got out of the way on the training field as he had a team incuding Andy Robinson, Dave Aldred Phil Larder and several others.

Am I hallucinating, or is this article trying to re-write history as an apology for Deans?

PLUS - is there a correct way to be an international head coach in this professional era?

 

[cyclopath]

Wow. I saw he had an article but I didn't read it before as I gave up on him a while back.
Although he's not denying there were assistant coaches, just that anyone would remember who they were or that they were any good.
Doesn't really say much for his opinion about Robbie, you know, given that his winning % is not that flash. Perhaps he didn't dictate enough?

 

[GaffaCHinO]

Spiro has a massive boner when it comes to the aru, o'neil and deans. Prob so he can stay on their good side to get the good stories. Which this isnt one.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk 2

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Spiro, mate, you've really got to stop sniffing glue and then writing about rugby. Firstly, to compare the record of Deans and Henry is laughable. Henry's structure is clearly superior, not only because he won the world cup, but because they've held the Bledisloe for longer than most of us can remember. In a head-to-head comparison, it's not even close.

Secondly, as Gags pointed out, MacQueen had several assistants over the years. I could have named a few of them myself quite easily. Clive Woodward was the same. He had specialist coaches out the wazoo.

Spiro is totally, absolutely, unequivocally, flat out wrong about this. System is everything.

 

[James Buchanan]

I read the article earlier today. Both at that time and now, I dismissed it as Spiro playing his role as a general cheerleader for the ARU etc... It has been generally the position he has taken in most of the articles I have read of his so I rarely pay them any mind.

 

[fatprop]

mmm I would have thought both approaches can be equally effective.

 

[waratahjesus]

I don't think there is a right or wrong approach. You have to ask, with the quality of players in NZ do people think Deans wouldn't have achieved there?

The correct method to coaching would surely be the one that gets the most out of the players available to you. Unfortunately if you take winning out if the equation it's very hard to measure.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I actually agree that success is possible with either approach, but not for any of the reasons that Spiro pointed out in his article. If anything, he made a case *against* the dictatorial style. Bringing Deans into the discussion hardly improves his argument due to the fact that he's comparing him with a much more successful coach who had the opposite approach. Henry clearly learned some lessons from his coaching stint in the NH and adjusted his approach accordingly.

 

[The Rant]

theres no 'one right way' - that's going to come down to the coach, their style, their personality and way they relate to people, their brains, their ability and thats got to match with the players - their profiles, make-up, the differing dynamics.
It seems clear after following deans for the past 5 tears and reading about the history prior to the wallabies that he lacks an ability to judge a team or personal dynamic. This has meant that over the years, be it fellow coaches or his players, he alienates by default - not as a deliberate strategy.

To put it another way:
Deans is always big on talking like its a corporation. Well being a corporate stooge and having studied management and leadership styles I can see pretty clear barriers to success in Deans' approach. In all management transitions there are ways to correctly diagnose the situation to be able to properly judge what needs to happen, which alliances need to be formed, where new information should be coming from, which things to build on and which things to replace.
Taking the theory deeper - when taking over a team, department or division you need to work out - Is this a Start-up, a Turn-around, A Realignment or are we just Sustaining success. Clearly Deans walked into a department and judges this to be a Turnaround. Probably right, but a case for a Realinment could also be made - which has a very different list of actions to do successfully. In any case - he chose turnaround which requires large-scale overhaul of systems, personal and direction setting. But this approach will only wrk if you've done your homework. Spent time getting to fully understand the extent and root causes of the perceived problems - the what is never as important as the why. You also need to understand the company culture, the history, the traditions, the internal and external perceptions in order to introduce measures that will build on the companies strengths and minimize weakness. Here's where I think Deans made massive mistakes. He never took the time to really understand what Aussie Rugby is all about - what it's built on for the past 30 years. And he didn't take time to better understand the aussie psyche. Deans made the classic error for a new manager and walked in and said 'well this worked at my old company, so it's going to work here'.

When he's finally a free agent I'll definitely not be considering him next time we want a high profile guest speaker to hold a lecture for my office around motivation or communication or leadership or strategy.

 

[redstragic]

And the emphasis on developing the game plan was to give "clarity" to the players.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...ning-system-20121012-27i9p.html#ixzz29DHyeY1J

Defeats his own argument there, no one can accuse the Wobs of having clarity throughout the Deans tenure. And TT is in the mix as well, surely Deans talks with him in the car park or on the bus or whatever.

Pure and simple, Deans and co. pick a talented team then get them to play a style of Rugby not native to them. They do it over and over and expects better results.

 

[liquor box]

First, you'll need to read the article that I link to below.

WARNING - Do not have any liquids in your mouth whilst reading it - I almost buggered my new laptop

The core tenet of the article is that Robbie Deans is in fact a choice coach because ignoring your assistant coaches isn't a bad thing after all because:

"You don't need to have a cabal of coaches to achieve clarity of method for a team. A smart and dictatorial head coach can do this, too. Does anyone know who Vince Lombardi's assistant coaches were? What about Craig Bellamy's, Des Hasler's or Wayne Bennett's? The most successful Wallabies coach, with a 76 per cent winning record, was Rod Macqueen. Who were his assistants? Macqueen was a one-man band."​

​

​

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/democratic-or-dictatorial-best-coaching-system-is-a-winning-system-20121012-27i9p.html#ixzz29BB9dchO​

If I'm not mistaken, Rod McQueen had assistants which included Tim Lane and Jeff Miller for the 99 RWC and some guy called Ewen McKenzie later on. He was and is known as a manager rather than a coach.

I also remember Jake White famously handing over his back line to Eddie Jones during their RWC win, and if you read Clive Woodwards autobiography, he also got out of the way on the training field as he had a team incuding Andy Robinson, Dave Aldred Phil Larder and several others.

Am I hallucinating, or is this article trying to re-write history as an apology for Deans?

PLUS - is there a correct way to be an international head coach in this professional era?

I like that Wayne Bennets assistant is only 3 words from the answer

 

[rugbyisfun]

You would have to say Deans scratched his head when he first arrived in Oz thinking 'geeze these blokes are a bit different to the lads back in Canterbury'.

The situation he found himself in is a prime example on why Spiro is wrong.

I'm sure the Gen Y issues present them-self in NZ just as they do Australia. But I would happily bet my house and everything it in that the system that one would put in place to deal with the calibre and experience of player in the Crusaders vs the Wallabies would be miles apart.

As mentioned above (previous posts) this is where Deans has failed. He, his assistants, his team manager have failed to inspire the current group and provide them with 'clarity'.

I was extremely fortunate to have attended a Leadership Luncheon/Forum/Piss Up last year in Sydney organised by Peter Switzer. The speakers were John Howard, some bloke from Fairfax and Link.

Howard was brilliant, the Fairfax blokes bit presented a good opportunity to sneak out for a leak and a smoke, Link, however, stole the show.

In short, he spoke about how he had to have a serious look at how to deal with this new generation of rugby player at the Reds. How he opened a twitter account . How he used to get the 'young guys' in and show then pretty pictures and flashy things and heaps of footage of them playing. He took time to get to know Family members, he knew what the 'clicks' were within the group. He spoke about accountability, about making everyone feel like they had a responsibility to add something.

I could go on for another two paras, but I think you get my drift.

There were quite a few rugby blokes in the room that day. We all gathered in the hotel lobby for post luncheon peronis (that morphed into a 2am finish over the road at Jacksons on George....).

We were all in agreeance that day that Link should be rushed into the Wobs job post haste.

His 'system' is what Australian needs needs. Desperately .

 

[I like to watch]

I'm sure Link is a great guy and a good coach and might be good at Test level.
But I have been to a million of these lunches, and they all look and sound great.
FFS Michael Foley had the room eating up his stuff at a lunch earlier this year.

 

[rugbyisfun]

I'm sure Link is a great guy and a good coach and might be good at Test level.
But I have been to a million of these lunches, and they all look and sound great.
FFS Michael Foley had the room eating up his stuff at a lunch earlier this year.

I see your point here. This was a completely different affair though. I was s..ting Myself for Link thinking he was going to come across as a complete boof head having to follow little Johnny. And Howard was impressive.

Peter Switzer was excellent as MC and asked some very hard questions about what makes a good leader

 

[Schadenfreude]

I'm sure Link is a great guy and a good coach and might be good at Test level.
But I have been to a million of these lunches, and they all look and sound great.
FFS Michael Foley had the room eating up his stuff at a lunch earlier this year.

Link has also proved that he can walk the talk.

I'd prefer he stayed at the Reds.

 

[boyo]

Pure and simple, Deans and co. pick a talented team then get them to play a style of Rugby not native to them. They do it over and over and expects better results.

A definition of madness: doing the same thing but expecting a different result.

Also is "agreeance" a word? Why not use "agreement"?

 

[Slim 293]

I see your point here. This was a completely different affair though. I was s..ting Myself for Link thinking he was going to come across as a complete boof head having to follow little Johnny. And Howard was impressive.

Peter Switzer was excellent as MC and asked some very hard questions about what makes a good leader

I'm sure that even Quade could follow Howard and come across as less of a boofhead.........

 

[rugbyisfun]

I'm sure that even Quade could follow Howard and come across as less of a boofhead...

Ha. now now...

 

[waratahjesus]

We were all in agreeance that day that Link should be rushed into the Wobs job post haste.

His 'system' is what Australian needs needs. Desperately .

It's interesting to think about the Reds system in that context then think abut applying it to the wallabies. I actually think if Link was to take the job he would have to reinvent this style again. At state level where guys know there going to be there for a few years and you have less selection issues, being friends and a coach is something you can afford more.

How would a guy like Quade take it if Ewen did his gameplan and decided to drop him? What if his form didn't warrant selection. Would it make it better for him to be friends with Quade or create a sense of betrayal? I'm not sure there is a style you can take from one team to another.

Coaches like link have shown they can learn and adapt. If they fail to adapt again (which I believe may be Deans fault) then it renders any good they did obsolete.

 

[rugbyisfun]

It's interesting to think about the Reds system in that context then think abut applying it to the wallabies. I actually think if Link was to take the job he would have to reinvent this style again. At state level where guys know there going to be there for a few years and you have less selection issues, being friends and a coach is something you can afford more.

How would a guy like Quade take it if Ewen did his gameplan and decided to drop him? What if his form didn't warrant selection. Would it make it better for him to be friends with Quade or create a sense of betrayal? I'm not sure there is a style you can take from one team to another.

Coaches like link have shown they can learn and adapt. If they fail to adapt again (which I believe may be Deans fault) then it renders any good they did obsolete.

Yep, very valid points you raise.

I reckon with Links experience with the Reds, and past experience working under Eddie Jones with the Wobs puts him in a very strong position as far as having a good understanding of what is required, and being able to adapt accordingly.