LOCKED: Time to Sack Deans?

[farva]

I was a little disappointed that Deans has continued to select Ma'afu, Chisholm and Hoiles in the test squad / team (no Brumby fans, its not an attack on you). These guys are not the answer and there are other young players that we could select (Think Douglas / Simmons / Weeks / Slipper / even fatty Houston).

What he has done has dropped a few players at the right time to give them a kick up the arse (think Sharpe for the SA tour in 2008, and what he has done since then. Hopefully the same will happen with Mitchell being left out of the original squad, and Giteau being put on notice).

Do I think its time to sack him? No. He was hired to get a world cup, and he has started putting all of his eggs in one basket with this one a bit now.

 

[cyclopath]

people are ignorant of the fact that deans has taken an interest in the whole australian game rather than the the final, selected national team, done well on both fronts. just havent improved to the point where we can beat everyone.....yet

I don't think people are at all ignorant.
I have a simplistic view that the national coach ought to be focussed on coaching the national team, and getting results. If we don't beat the ABs and Bokke > 50% of the time, I can accept that, especially in light of this current player group. But the poor showing against other nations including Scotland, England and Fiji suck balls.
Other administrators have the job of planning for the development of the game nationally.
I would not sack him, but I do agree he is being given more latitude than those before.
And Scarfy makes some good points - especially the inscrutable game plan and drivel part. We need to see results pretty damn soon.

 

[fatprop]

How do we know? That is the point. Not many that haven't been forced selections have been tried yet out of form players keep their spots. By the same logic Kearns and Eales and others would not have got a start, indeed now days I doubt they would get on Deans bench if he had to pick them from the same places as Dwyer picked them.

Because the world and pro rugby has moved on since then, the "Kearns and Eales" are in a pro program these days and has been since he left school.

Deans has continually brought in players, but rarely do those players start the next test match in their first squad selection. They get in the squad, learn the system and are looked over in detail. Expect bench spots and starts in November

 

[RedsHappy]

...stupid idea, no! .....in deans time we've seen some fantastic talent rise. Genia, Cooper, O'Connor, etc. Australian rugby is better with him at the top.

With due respect to you louie, this above is one of my personal favourites from the Deans Fans' Library. As we have lost more and more games, these types of more abstract, hard to disprove, arguments for Deans have increased exponentially. (The latest amusing one I am hearing btw is that Deans is somehow largely responsible for the recent success of our 7s and U20 squads!)

There are some major flaws with this claim though:

1. As chief has duly noted, picking excellent talent and trialling them and if suitable promoting them, is what top coaches as meant to do before getting out of bed, it's just a baseline requirement, it is long way from sustained, proven excellence in coaching, that must be assessed by results achieved over two or more seasons (w-l % ratio being the classic benchmark in most sports);

2. Aside from the 'young stars' you mention above, the have been some, well, umm, 'young and youngish flops and semi-flops' from the 'made by Deans' racing stable, namely: Burgess, Barnes, Mumm, Brown, Cross. Almost the same number as are on your list. But you hear less about them.

3. The three admittedly very talented players you note were all highlighted as potentially excellent professional rugby players in the making from their Brisbane senior school days. And, of all the people that really promoted Genia and Cooper (when they were 'nobodies'), that was Phil Mooney, coach of the Reds until October 2009. It was Phil who gave them a lift into the Reds and started to give them some useful game time, or on reserve. From there, yes, Deans saw their talent, took some risks and moved them forward....the point being though that numerous others had taken the relatively tougher and earlier 'promotion risk' before RD arrived for them with his 2009 selections.

Summary: RD's score card on this 'promoting youth and talent' parameter is, overall, more a 6.5-7.0 net net, than a 9. And that's a base minimum score for this parameter for a elite coach paid the big $s in a comparatively wealthy sport.

 

[Reddy!]

Bravo RedsHappy!

 

[Gnostic]

My arguments are that we all should be considering that there are indeed options. To blindly state that there aren't options when there are in fact quite a few players who haven't been given a chance is a defeatist attitude. Those who state this may as well be saying "this is as good as it is going to get and you may as well get used to it." Well I say *^%$# that, thast is not how we as Australians have managed to excell at most sports at an International level for so long. I will not accept that and I expect those in the ARU to be searching and pushing for new things to be tried to change the results. You at least try, to continue with the same shit game in game out is tantamount to admitting defeat.

 

[Scotty]

Yep, none of the proposed players are any better than the incumbents, we don't have a THP, an 8 or a backline that can be settled on (how many times have been able to run out the same centres over the last few years?).

Deans has backed certain players which is his prerogative.

But to assume that the other options thrown around are really a marked upgrades is fanciful.

My biggest concerns are at lock, centre and fullback where I don't see where our 'world class' player is going to come from. Other than that we are relying (as always) on getting our no.1 team on the park for big games. We don't, and never have had the depth to beat the likes of NZ without our top players.

 

[Moses]

One point on Deans' win/loss record, he's coaching at a time when we play 9 3N games a year - I reckon home and away win/loss records by coach against each team would be an interesting read.

 

[Ruggo]

Over all this is a very uncouragous team selection by Deans and co. Sounds like Justin Beaver is only keeping Digby's jersey warm this week. Hope Deans works a miricle and actually uses his bench as we need to see how Simmons goes. The non selection of Higgers baffles me. Brown is like teflon. Nothing sticks, no matter how bad he is.

There is always Robbie's favorate saying of "Nothing is forever" but of course non performing Wallabies are excempt from this.

This this is the team so go the Wallabies, though I live in fear.

 

[Scotty]

I expect that JOC (James O'Connor) and Mitchell are actually trialling for the other wing position once Digby is back. I also expect that Deans has realised that none of the other candidates are really up to doing the job at FB for the Wallabies in a 3N (not yet anyway).

I hope that Hodgson gets more time of the bench, particularly if we are to play the up tempo game plan. I hope that he shows up Brown in his performance, and starts next week with Higgin on the bench.

I hope that Horne is used at least sometimes one out and straightening from Cooper, and Giteau ranges wider and uses AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) straightening. I hope the Cooper doesn't have to tackle Fourie too many times.

 

[AussieDominance]

Let's just sort this out once and for all. Both Fainga'a's will never be Test Match standard footballer's. Anthony is as one dimensional as they come with no skill level, the bloke can't pass side to side and Saia is too small and has a poor set peice - pick Frier as the third hooker.

 

[Ruggo]

Let's just sort this out once and for all. Both Fainga'a's will never be Test Match standard footballer's. Anthony is as one dimensional as they come with no skill level, the bloke can't pass side to side and Saia is too small and has a poor set peice - pick Frier as the third hooker.

Fainga'a is too small so you will take Frier instead. Did you not contradict yourself?

As for Anthony, you're not Jeremy Paul in disguise are you?

 

[DPK]

Let's just sort this out once and for all. Both Fainga'a's will never be Test Match standard footballer's. Anthony is as one dimensional as they come with no skill level, the bloke can't pass side to side and Saia is too small and has a poor set peice - pick Frier as the third hooker.

Frier didn't make it through the one Tah's game he played this year and hasn't been playing club.

 

[dobduff11]

"Anthony is as one dimensional as they come with no skill level, the bloke can't pass side to side"

How has anthony got no skill level did you see the grubbers he put in for people this year what about his out the back offload to quade earlier in the year. If you want to see a finger pass well just watch the reds v canes match on the internet. He can kick well, pass well, defend really well and he runs hard straight lines how much more skillful do u want. Oh wait you probably still want gits at 10 and quade at 12 for more creativty in the 12 position

 

[Gagger]

With due respect to you louie, this above is one of my personal favourites from the Deans Fans' Library. As we have lost more and more games, these types of more abstract, hard to disprove, arguments for Deans have increased exponentially. (The latest amusing one I am hearing btw is that Deans is somehow largely responsible for the recent success of our 7s and U20 squads!)

There are some major flaws with this claim though:

RH - you certainly love having it both ways don't you?

Selection apparently is such a baseline pre-requisite that Deans deserves no credit, but if he picks the 'wrong guys' he's rubbish.

None of the performing players he's developed are his successes - they were all done by Phil Mooney, but the ones you perceive as not performing so well need to be chalked against Deans.

You've previously railed about how much time a head coach has on his hands, that he should also be responsible for development pathways, but above you state that Deans should get no credit for the U20s or 7s successes.

Deans is by no means untouchable, but if I'm to find your and other posters' arguments against Deans credible, you guys need to which side of these arguments you're gonna use and try sticking to them.

 

[Reddy!]

Let's just sort this out once and for all. Both Fainga'a's will never be Test Match standard footballer's. Anthony is as one dimensional as they come with no skill level, the bloke can't pass side to side and Saia is too small and has a poor set peice - pick Frier as the third hooker.

Rugby is a team sport. If the way he plays fits in with the team and players around him, he is as good as they come. I would never call him one dimensional though. I have watched him closely this year for the Reds and he has shown enough to say that he is a good decision maker, runs great lines, can kick if he needs to or sees an opportunity, is fast, is a straight runner and one of the best defenders in world rugby. Anyway he is not in the team so the point is moot for this weekend at least.

 

[Joe Blow]

Let's just sort this out once and for all. Both Fainga'a's will never be Test Match standard footballer's. Anthony is as one dimensional as they come with no skill level, the bloke can't pass side to side and Saia is too small and has a poor set peice - pick Frier as the third hooker.

Adam Freir is a club level hooker at best. Every time he has pulled on a Wallaby jumper he has been rag-dolled by legitimate test players at every turn.

 

[Reddy!]

Adam Freir is a club level hooker at best. Every time he has pulled on a Wallaby jumper he has been rag-dolled by legitimate test players at every turn.

Eh...I sorta disagree with this as well. I wouldn't say he isn't up to it or gets rag-dolled, but probably doesn't have the game or physical presence to impose himself on big test match games. He gets by.

 

[Joe Blow]

I do not believe that the issue is the lack of cattle as FP suggests. We have 4 S14 sides, 3 of which went pretty well this year. Even the Force went well when some of their stars returned.
Depth has always been an issue for the Wallabies but Deans' predecessors have managed to get past that.
Deans should be able to mould a pretty good team from that bunch even taking into account the injury situation.
His selections have been sometimes baffling and he seems unable to motivate his chosen team.

If we do not perform reasonably well in this 3Ns I reckon he may be pushed out.

 

[Reddy!]

@ Gagger: To me, critics of Deans see that arguments in support of him are based on things that in the past, have never been a strength when talking about the head coach. Things that aren't really that big of a deal. Things, perhaps, the head coach should be doing anyway. For example:

"Okay okay, so we lost 6 test matches in a row, but Deans made Peter Hynes play club rugby this weekend"

The cracks and rust in the wall are being painted over with fluffy nice things, to make you feel good and yummy and warm on the inside. For the most part, phrases like "Building for the future" are a load of bullshit.