LOCKED: Time to Sack Deans?

[RedsHappy]

....Like I said before IMO the result of the games is not as important as the way they play, so even if they lose to the ABs next week as long as they apply themselves to at least this level next week

Gnostic, why do you say this? Are you saying that the right attitude, even with losses, will carry forward to better wins later?

You and I agree on most things. Partly I ask above as I am not inclined to be so 'generous', if that's the word. I think it's perfectly reasonable that we should now be expecting wins against the ABs, especially at home. This is Deans third full season in charge, he knowns like we all do that beating the ABs is a crucial and proper marker for a Wallaby coach's success. I think it's quite reasonable that we should be aiming to win these Tris. Indeed, this is precisely what the CEO of the ARU says he expects this year, and I don't assess that as just symbolic rhetoric from him. Without solid home wins, and plenty of them, we have no hope of winning these Tris.

If we're not seriously aiming win these Tris, and/or the BC, what are we aiming to do? Be the 'most improved team' this year and win a small copper jug with Cooper and Genia's name on it? Have GAGR essays in September noting 'great platform built for the RWC, pity only 2 Tris wins this year, but it's all coming right'?

 

[Crow]

If we're not seriously aiming win these Tris, and/or the BC, what are we aiming to do? Be the 'most improved team' this year and win a small copper jug with Cooper and Genia's name on it? Have GAGR essays in September noting 'great platform built for the RWC, pity only 2 Tris wins this year, but it's all coming right'?

I think the 3N are pretty much the top nations playing against each other. So you're saying that RD can only be judged a success if the WB are the best side in the world? Given our current players, would you expect them to beat the AB on any given day?

 

[ACT Crusader]

However one of the bright points for me, which has been replicated in every test this year, largely missed by most commentators is the total absence of a successful driving maul against the Wallabies (excepting the one from the 5 metre lineout where Matfield moved it from the top). This has been largely due to the efforts of Sharpe and Mumm driving though at the time of formation and attacking the ball carrier and subsequent receivers. Excellent work.

On first viewing I thought it was obstruction as no one was engaged before they moved forward.

 

[daz]

RH, you have gone a bit too far on the extreme side. Do you seriously expect us to go from 1 win and a bottom place finish last year to a clean sweep this year? I think we should be aiming to win as well, but the reality is we need to be taking baby steps. As long as those steps are forward moving, I am pretty happy.

What Gnostic said is perfectly reasonable; it is the intent and the application that is important, and presumably the wins will follow.

Did you see the post game conference? The guys were exhausted and left it all out on the field. They did what they had to do and won comfortably against a side that is ranked #2 in the world.

I ask nothing more than that from our team. If the guys play in the same do or die spirit against the ABs but go down fighting, well, given where we were this time last year I can live with that.

It IS coming together. Slowly but surely it really is starting to happen.....

 

[HG]

Gnostic, why do you say this? Are you saying that the right attitude, even with losses, will carry forward to better wins later?

You and I agree on most things. Partly I ask above as I am not inclined to be so 'generous', if that's the word. I think it's perfectly reasonable that we should now be expecting wins against the ABs, especially at home. This is Deans third full season in charge, he knowns like we all do that beating the ABs is a crucial and proper marker for a Wallaby coach's success. I think it's quite reasonable that we should be aiming to win these Tris. Indeed, this is precisely what the CEO of the ARU says he expects this year, and I don't assess that as just symbolic rhetoric from him. Without solid home wins, and plenty of them, we have no hope of winning these Tris.

If we're not seriously aiming win these Tris, and/or the BC, what are we aiming to do? Be the 'most improved team' this year and win a small copper jug with Cooper and Genia's name on it? Have GAGR essays in September noting 'great platform built for the RWC, pity only 2 Tris wins this year, but it's all coming right'?

I am sure that Deans wants to win the Tries and the BC. However what Gnostic may be eluding to is that he also has his eye on the WC next year.
So if the Wallabies are beaten by the AB's all is not lost if they play with passion and skill but are beaten by a better team on the night.
You can only ask that you players to play to their best. I think some of his selections have been a bit strange but we are not as close to the team as he is. (how may of you would have droped Giteau for Saturdays test?)
I may not agree with all he is doing but I support him 100% on building to the world cup.

 

[DPK]

On first viewing I thought it was obstruction as no one was engaged before they moved forward.

Thats the Italian tactic, isn't it? Dont engage anyone to the maul while defending so the opposition gets done for obstruction?

I've seen them do it previously but I haven't seen a referee award a penalty in their favour.

 

[the gambler]

The reds did it in the Super 14 and I have seen a number of penalties for it in a number of games. What teams have to remember is that eventually one of them has to go in to attempt to get to the ball carrier so that he is obstructed. Letting them run past you then tackling them from behind probably means there is no obstruction to be ruled on.

 

[Gnostic]

Gnostic, why do you say this? Are you saying that the right attitude, even with losses, will carry forward to better wins later?

I say this because I am a realist. I do think that the winning of the game is important, and if you don't care if you win then go play thirsty thirds, but in saying that I think Daz and HG summed up my views pretty well. We are coming off one of the low points in Oz rugby in the professional era IMO. What has been missing from a lot of the games, and a big reason for my disillusionment with Deans is that the team has not turned up in all their games with the required level of physicallity, application and passion, think Ireland, Scotland and England last year, Fiji, England (2) and Ireland this year.

As Daz said if they play with the application, consistancy, passion and accuracy that can be rightly expected of the Wallabies then the wins will follow, not on every occassion but in a significantly higher percentage than what we have seen. The players and coach have EARNED a reprieve from my whining and whinging, their ears/eyes will be battered again if they fail to back up last weeks performance with a similar application to task.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

What Gnostic said, 100%

 

[Gagger]

Hard core Knee-Jerks dwindling

 

[Langthorne]

Hard core Knee-Jerks dwindling

How long till the match against the All Blacks?

 

[RedsHappy]

1. RH, you have gone a bit too far on the extreme side. 2. Do you seriously expect us to go from 1 win and a bottom place finish last year to a clean sweep this year? I think we should be aiming to win as well, but the reality is we need to be taking baby steps. As long as those steps are forward moving, I am pretty happy. What Gnostic said is perfectly reasonable; it is the intent and the application that is important, and presumably the wins will follow. Did you see the post game conference? 3. The guys were exhausted and left it all out on the field. 4. They did what they had to do and won comfortably against a side that is ranked #2 in the world. I ask nothing more than that from our team. If the guys play in the same do or die spirit against the ABs but go down fighting, well, given where we were this time last year I can live with that. It IS coming together. Slowly but surely it really is starting to happen.....

Daz, I always enjoy and (mostly ;-)) respect your posts, so can I answer via the numbers added above:

1. Mate, only a few weeks back you posted (paraphrasing, in the context of our debate re RD etc): '...I do expect to see silverware this year and I'll be upset if we don't get any...'. That's what/all I am saying (but I am more critical than you re the journey to this point from 2008 on). For me, to call this stated goal of a 2010 Tris or BC win 'too far on the extreme side' is a marker of reduced expectations and tolerance that I honestly don't share, and will never share. I keep making the point: this is what JO'N is himself expecting, he's said it only a month ago. And, given the huge costs of this team, and the investments made, he's quite right.

2. Didn't ever say 'clean sweep'. Did say: 2010 goal rightly should be a Tris win, and/or BC. More cautiously, I have stated for weeks now that my marker for 'just giving RD the benefit of the doubt' would be 3 Tris games wins (I should have added: 1 of those should be away.) Even then I cringe at my own lowered expectations.

3. If one's expectations have been lowered such that we say (or have to say): 'look, the 2009 and June 2010 precedents to where we are in July 2010 are so bad that all that's now realistic is asking for 'intense application and doing our very best' ' then I guess i feel pretty angry that the precedents are that way such that this is where we are, and good application is as good as it might get. But, OK, perhaps that is today the realistic and only sensible approach to take.

4. Yes, like Brisbane last year, more or less. I was excited and generally a Deans Fanboy then. Different story come December. Worse come June 19, 2010. But, if we win on Saturday, that will be 2 of my required 3 'baseline' Tris wins, and I will begin to rebuild hope and assess that there are (tentative) signs of genuine progress for a world-class Wallabies to emerge. A third 'away' win after that, and I will back off any sacking-of-coaches demands and look forward (like Julia).

 

[rsea]

Daz, I always enjoy and (mostly ;-)) respect your posts, so can I answer via the numbers added above:

1. Mate, only a few weeks back you posted (paraphrasing, in the context of our debate re RD etc): '...I do expect to see silverware this year and I'll be upset if we don't get any...'. That's what/all I am saying (but I am more critical than you re the journey to this point from 2008 on). For me, to call this stated goal of a 2010 Tris or BC win 'too far on the extreme side' is a marker of reduced expectations and tolerance that I honestly don't share, and will never share. I keep making the point: this is what JO'N is himself expecting, he's said it only a month ago. And, given the huge costs of this team, and the investments made, he's quite right.

The team still lacks experience. Any significant silverware (tri / bled) that came our way this year would be the result of a cataclysmic fuckup on behalf of the ABs and the Boks. Expectations like this are well beyond hopeful.

2. Didn't ever say 'clean sweep'. Did say: 2010 goal rightly should be a Tris win, and/or BC. More cautiously, I have stated for weeks now that my marker for 'just giving RD the benefit of the doubt' would be 3 Tris games wins (I should have added: 1 of those should be away.) Even then I cringe at my own lowered expectations.

We'd all like our guys to shore up 2/3 home games and pickup an away win but again I think you're being overly optimistic for a pass mark.

3. If one's expectations have been lowered such that we say (or have to say): 'look, the 2009 and June 2010 precedents to where we are in July 2010 are so bad that all that's now realistic is asking for 'intense application and doing our very best' ' then I guess i feel pretty angry that the precedents are that way such that this is where we are, and good application is as good as it might get. But, OK, perhaps that is today the realistic and only sensible approach to take.

Sometimes it's necessary to go backwards before going forward. It's not uncommon. It's not been pioneered by the Wallabies but we're 3 years through a process which will ultimately yield a better squad for the next couple of periods.

4. Yes, like Brisbane last year, more or less. I was excited and generally a Deans Fanboy then. Different story come December. Worse come June 19, 2010. But, if we win on Saturday, that will be 2 of my required 3 'baseline' Tris wins, and I will begin to rebuild hope and assess that there are (tentative) signs of genuine progress for a world-class Wallabies to emerge. A third 'away' win after that, and I will back off any sacking-of-coaches demands and look forward (like Julia).

If this is what it takes for you to take sacking the coaches off the table than you're again being unrealistic. I don't even think you believe, that sacking Deans is a good idea at this stage.

 

[RedsHappy]

The team still lacks experience. Any significant silverware (tri / bled) that came our way this year would be the result of a cataclysmic fuckup on behalf of the ABs and the Boks. Expectations like this are well beyond hopeful. We'd all like our guys to shore up 2/3 home games and pickup an away win but again I think you're being overly optimistic for a pass mark. Sometimes it's necessary to go backwards before going forward. It's not uncommon. It's not been pioneered by the Wallabies but we're 3 years through a process which will ultimately yield a better squad for the next couple of periods. If this is what it takes for you to take sacking the coaches off the table than you're again being unrealistic. I don't even think you believe, that sacking Deans is a good idea at this stage.

rsea, I respect your point of view. But I do think you've - indirectly - made my main point for me.

 

[rsea]

Hrmm Perhaps I've only got one eye open but I'm not seeing it

 

[RedsHappy]

Hard core Knee-Jerks dwindling

Gagger, whatever the truth, it will out in time.

May I raise a request with you: it may have escaped my attention, and, if so, apologies, but I cannot find anywhere that you have clearly stated a definition of your own 'precise achievement markers' for this Wallabies coaching group. As you'd recognise, I don't mean easy vagaries like 'Deans is progressing depth' or 'it's all coming together now you silly knee-jerks', etc, but rather, after 2.5 coaching years, something more definitive, like:

- 'Deans will have categorically succeeded as Wallaby coach when we win the RWC 2011, and that's the only marker I hold until that date'.

- Or, 'X wins in the 2010 Tris with say 2 wins v ABs';

- Or, 'Wallabies have a w-l ratio of 65%+ over 2012 and 2013 seasons when Deans' contributions will be in evidence after years of prior development, and I don't care much what happens before then;

- Or ' 3 games in a row where our forwards continuously conquer a major team at the breakdown, win or lose the match, don't care..'

You know why I ask. It's hard be part of a constructive argument if there are only 'assertions' of points of view, not hard markers that properly pre-define what constitutes the success (or failure) of that point of view.

 

[Scotty]

In the risk of being said to look for excuses for Deans, I believe if there was any other referee in the first Sloe game last year we would have won it. Or obviously if Barnes passed when he should have we also would have won it.

RH,

You, IMO, blame Deans too much for the losses, particularly against the Allblacks. The team as a whole needs to take responsibility for being unable to close out games, in particular the more experienced players such as Giteau and Sharpe. Once upon a time our leaders were the likes of Larkham, Gregan, Eales, Kefu and Mortlock. These players together ensured we went through a golden period in Australian rugby, an era where we often came from behind to win just the ABs are doing to us now. It is impossible for the coach to have complete control over what happens on a field as you are implying.

Our experienced players stood up for the first game this year. The likes of Elsom, Genia, Moore and Sharpe had games befitting their talent and experience and low and behold we won. I recognise that Deans is a major factor in determining the outcome of the game, and the use of his bench is often poor, however the players also need their fair share of the blame for poor performances.

 

[Lee Grant]

Geez - a lot of words in this thread that didn't say a lot.

I thought I was the master of that but I learned a few things.

What I hate is when you start talking about an apple somebody who doesn't like apples starts talking about oranges. Instead of getting the guy back to talking about apples you get into the orange discussion. What you said about the apple was valid but because the other fellow was right about his oranges you have to be mistaken. Meantime a banana guy comes into the discussion and says his thing and folks feel compelled to answer his arguments.

When that is done and dusted someone starts talking about ham sandwiches and all hell breaks loose, but all the time you just wanted to talk about apples.

Let's not assume too much because this guy said this he must mean that, and not only must he mean that, but he must be able to measure it. It's better for the guy not to respond because he is being led down a path of oranges.

He should have just gone with the apple vibe. People are allowed to go with the vibe. I love the vibe.

Those words didn't say of lot either did they? Bored again.

.

 

[rsea]

So you take your coffee black with a double?

 

[Ruggo]

Geez - a lot of words in this thread that didn't say a lot.

I thought I was the master of that but I learned a few things.

What I hate is when you start talking about an apple somebody who doesn't like apples starts talking about oranges. Instead of getting the guy back to talking about apples you get into the orange discussion. What you said about the apple was valid but because the other fellow was right about his oranges you have to be mistaken. Meantime a banana guy comes into the discussion and says his thing and folks feel compelled to answer his arguments.

When that is done and dusted someone starts talking about ham sandwiches and all hell breaks loose, but all the time you just wanted to talk about apples.

Let's not assume too much because this guy said this he must mean that, and not only must he mean that, but he must be able to measure it. It's better for the guy not to respond because he is being led down a path of oranges.

He should have just gone with the apple vibe. People are allowed to go with the vibe. I love the vibe.

Those words didn't say of lot either did they? Bored again.

.

Can we rename this thread fruit salad. :

Thanks for making me hungry Lee. I don't know wether to have an Apple, Orange or Banana though. :lmao: