Hickey watch

[Scarfman]

Hickey has also defended his speculating over the past two weeks on how many points the Waratahs will need to make the finals. He rejects suggestions this distracts team preparation.

"Every coach knows exactly how many points they have got and have to get. I don't have any trouble talking about it," he said.

"When you get to this stage of the season you have to start looking at what you think historically will get you into the four. Every coach would need that, except maybe the Cheetahs coach."

That coach, Naka Drotske, may wish to reply to that come May 1 when NSW play his 14th-placed side in Bloemfontein - the first match of their South African tour.

I've got a few issues here.

(1) I don't agree that figuring out how many points they'll need to get into the finals is useful. Apart from the difficulty of figuring out all the permutations 5 rounds out from the end, it sets the wrong tone for everyone.

(2) Nice idea to wind up the Cheetahs before you play them. How about this instead: "They're a very talented squad, they've just had their first win, so we'll need to be very careful about them. That's the thing about the Super 14, there's no easy games." How hard is that, Chris?

Of course, it's very hard to judge a coach's abilities without being in the squad. But I reckon that coaches that start saying crazy things in the media (EJ (Eddie Jones), Cueball, SCW) tend to be coaching teams on the slide.

 

[disco]

Maybe he should admit that his backline has yet to prove that they can catch & pass rather than worrying about what the Cheetahs coach is thinking.

It really is a disgrace that we are up to round 10 & the Tahs can't complete a backline move.

 

[Pfitzy]

I blame naza.

 

[disco]

I blame naza.

So do I his manlove for Tom carter is disgusting.

 

[naza]

Coach Chris Hickey says he is not about to cancel the cricket game NSW play for 10-15 minutes before every training run and replace it with extra catching and passing sessions. "It is more about decision-making than execution, knowing when you can look to offload that ball [or] need to hang on to it. I don't think 100 more passes a week is going to necessarily help in that regard."

That'll do me. That is up there with Eddie Jones' best.

Cause the NSW attack is so poor, we can't keep our forwards fresh with subs. That, and a lack of bonus points, is going to see us struggle to make the semis. And once there we'll not have any gas left in the tank anyway.

 

[Pfitzy]

:nta: He does seem to have missed the point - decision-making is fuck all without being actually able to PASS the ball. I think an extra 100 passes a week would be a good start. An extra 1000 would be better. With a ball covered in KY, while Dave Brockhoff tries to pin them down with a paintball gun (though Brock would probably use live ammo).

 

[cyclopath]

Well clearly they lack the capacity to make the decision to pass or off-load, even when the opportunity seems to be there (and it was, several times on Sat night), so given they will seldom actually attempt a pass or off-load, I would think being closer to 100% capable of making it would be good. 1000 passes would be a good start.
Of course it would help if they were not conditioned to play in a 20m wide corridor all day, and to reflexively turn inside or go to ground at the slightest hint of a defensive line. Given he seems to want them to play thus, perhaps he has a point. :nta:

 

[naza]

I marvel at people scapegoating the NSW coaches & assistant coaches over the past few years. What has the one constant been ? Phil Waugh's "leadership".

Waugh is killing us. Taking the penalty shot when 14 behind with 10 mins to go ? Opting for time consuming scrums off free kicks in the last 3-4 minutes ? The guy is killing the team by forcing a slow, deliberate style of play ("they're asleep out there") that is crippling our ability to attack. And as seen against the Bulls, its not like that style keeps the error rate low !

The only thing Waugh is leading the Tahs to is a mid-table finish.

 

[Pfitzy]

The justification being of course that if the penalty goes over, you only need to score two tries to win, and you don't have to convert one of those. You're putting your destiny back in your own hands rather than waiting for the referee to blow a penalty in the last minute. The game was long gone by then anyway.

 

[mark_s]

Earlier in the year Hickey was saying that it was better to win ugly than lose ugly - well what is his story now?

 

[Blue]

Earlier in the year Hickey was saying that it was better to win ugly than lose ugly - well what is his story now?

That it's okay to lose ugly as long as the opposition won ugly? ;D

 

[fatprop]

I marvel at people scapegoating the NSW coaches & assistant coaches over the past few years. What has the one constant been ? Phil Waugh's "leadership".

Waugh is killing us. Taking the penalty shot when 14 behind with 10 mins to go ? Opting for time consuming scrums off free kicks in the last 3-4 minutes ? The guy is killing the team by forcing a slow, deliberate style of play ("they're asleep out there") that is crippling our ability to attack. And as seen against the Bulls, its not like that style keeps the error rate low !

The only thing Waugh is leading the Tahs to is a mid-table finish.

I think it is numerous things, including Waugh's conservative approach.

Others are selecting bench players that offer no impact.

A range of players that don't seem to know their role after 2nd phase.

The whole side has been pedestrian all season, they seen unable to play at pace

 

[steiner]

I put it down to the coaches mainly. They don't appear to have focussed enough on skills, both forwards and backs and they appear to sometimes over-complicate things during the game, mainly the backs. No need to be doing plays all the time when you get as much forward momentum as the Tahs forwards have been getting. Just move the ball quickly and play the game a bit more naturally. And the tactical plays they do do they often screw up anyway.

A little less thinking and a little more feeling.

 

[Pfitzy]

I think it is numerous things, including Waugh's conservative approach.

OK, so rewind a few days, then take the situation where Waugh opts to kick for touch and they lose another lineout. The critics would be on here blathering about Waugh not taking the "safe" option of three to give the Tahs a chance at a win.

 

[cyclopath]

I think it is numerous things, including Waugh's conservative approach.

OK, so rewind a few days, then take the situation where Waugh opts to kick for touch and they lose another lineout. The critics would be on here blathering about Waugh not taking the "safe" option of three to give the Tahs a chance at a win.

Well, I wouldn't. I was gob-smacked when he called for that penalty kick, not least of all because it was not a "safe" option, but a fair way out. 14 down, 10 to go...no, I do not want to see my team taking the 3. For starters, a try if converted puts them within 7, which is better than being within 11. There was nothing good about that decision.

 

[Ash]

I think it is numerous things, including Waugh's conservative approach.

OK, so rewind a few days, then take the situation where Waugh opts to kick for touch and they lose another lineout. The critics would be on here blathering about Waugh not taking the "safe" option of three to give the Tahs a chance at a win.

Well, I wouldn't. I was gob-smacked when he called for that penalty kick, not least of all because it was not a "safe" option, but a fair way out. 14 down, 10 to go...no, I do not want to see my team taking the 3. For starters, a try if converted puts them within 7, which is better than being within 11. There was nothing good about that decision.

Agree 100%. Even if he kicked for touch and took the lineout and lost it, I still would've thought he did the right thing. The Tahs had struggled to score points, or even get close to scoring points, all game. And they struggled to get close to try scoring opportunities. 3 points was really, really, really no good for them - but getting close to the line and a chance to score was all they had.

Face it - Waugh made the wrong decision.

 

[Pfitzy]

Every decision is wrong when you lose. Though Whitaker copped the same criticism when he went for 3 rather than the bonus point against the Blues a few years back when they won.

I think if you're down by 14 and don't look like winning your lineouts, you take what you can get and make the Bulls aware they can't just keep shutting the game down by infringing. If you make those three then drive upfield, make the next decision when you're within 11.

 

[naza]

Except the Tahs' problem all game was winning good field position. We know their backs are so inept that long distance tries are beyond their reach. But you'd have to like your chances inside the opposition 22. They needed to build momentum and try and get some attacking rythym, not slow play down yet again.

I'm not shitting on Waugh for a poor call. Just pointing out that it seems to be part of his game plan - to slow things down. People loved to bag Gregan for being too slow and deliberate at the base of the ruck. Other than Burgess, the Tahs turned that into an art form against the Bulls.

 

[the gambler]

I marvel at people scapegoating the NSW coaches & assistant coaches over the past few years. What has the one constant been ? Phil Waugh's "leadership".

2006 We make the finals with Waugh in the team. 2007 - We come 2nd last when Waugh isn't in the team. 2008 - We lose the final with Waugh in the team.

Having said that I completely agree that the penalty shot was a very poor decision.

 

[Scarfman]

What he said.

^
|