Reddy!
Bob Davidson (42)
Completely off topic haha it's Jan Jorgensen.
LOCKED: Time to Sack Deans?
- Thread starter Gnostic
- Start date
- Status
Completely off topic haha it's Jan Jorgensen.
disco
Chilla Wilson (44)
No I think we have the right to blow off some steam, this team fails to deliver every single year they have been a team in progress for 3 years now when does this end? When do they deliver on thier talent & we do have talent & I'll name some of the players who would have to be in the top 3 players for thier position.
Benn Robinson - Best loosie going around.
TPN & Stephen Moore are as good as any hookers in world rugby.
Will Genia - Had a poor game last night but it's fair to say he's up there with Du Preez.
David Pocock - No doubt will retire as one of the best opensides ever.
AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) - Has never been outclassed or shut down by a direct opponent definitely the best utility back going around.
All but 1 of these blokes played last night, yet we still can't put together a full 80 minutes or a competitive Tri-nations team.
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
I agree Disco. This stuff about not having the cattle surprises me. Cooper and Gits (as a 12 or 15) are also very good players.
IF they all play well, and if the application and attitude are there.
Robbo, Genia and to a lesser extent Moore did not have good games; Giteau's form wobbles are well documented, and Cooper wasn't there, along with TPN.
I don't think (all) our players lack talent or ability, but I do think they lack the other things I mentioned, and certainly cohesion. Now that final point might be down to the coach, maybe some of the players don't like each other and don't play for each other, who knows.
disco
Chilla Wilson (44)
Yeah cattle is bullshit, I remember in the MacQueen days Kiwis always use to complain that the Aussie players were shit yet they always seem to get up & play well as a team.
The current crop have no direction Deans strikes me as one of these blokes that talks in riddles & leaves the players more confused than confident.
The current crop have no direction Deans strikes me as one of these blokes that talks in riddles & leaves the players more confused than confident.
disco
Chilla Wilson (44)
Louie,
Out of the All Blacks team name every player you think is world class (in the top 2-3 players in his position).
From the last 3 RWC winning teams how many players in the starting 15 would you have named as the best in thier position.
2007 Saffas: Matfield, Du Preez, Habana
2003 Poms: Johnson, Wilkinson, Dallaglio, Richard Hill, The front rowers I suppose.
1999 Wobs: Eales, Horan, larkham, Gregan, Burke, Kefu maybe.
As Dwyer said you need 5 superstars & build a team around them.
louie
Desmond Connor (43)
disco the point i was making was that while we have 5 superstars. the others are way way way below them.
each of those teams had lots of very strong players around them.
the 1999 wobs had burke, roff, etc etc. all around them.
to answer your question:
Kieran Read, Richie McCaw, Brad Thorn, Mils Muliaina, Daniel Carter, Conrad Smith, i could go on.
if had to pick a team from both all blacks and australia only Benn Robinson, Will Genia, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) would be in the 1st 15.
each of those teams had lots of very strong players around them.
the 1999 wobs had burke, roff, etc etc. all around them.
to answer your question:
Kieran Read, Richie McCaw, Brad Thorn, Mils Muliaina, Daniel Carter, Conrad Smith, i could go on.
if had to pick a team from both all blacks and australia only Benn Robinson, Will Genia, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) would be in the 1st 15.
Scott Allen
Trevor Allan (34)
Okay, last night did it for me and I had a serious think today about whether it's time to sack Robbie Deans. My thoughts then turned to the Wallabies goals and it ended up as a Blog Post which may well add more fuel to this fire - see http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/wallaby-goals/
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Me too Scarf. I have only been posting here for about 7 weeks, and what I would term this 'new negative fatalism' re Wallaby, or potential Wallaby, player quality has grown exponentially in that time.
It comes from a number of sources, but an identifiable one of course is the RD diehard supporters who are now making the subtle but noticeable shift away from the earlier proposition of 'RD is on the cusp of building a great Australian team' to 'RD is an exceptional coach whom unfortunately does not have the player quality to achieve the desired results due the failings in Australia's top player stock, and (for example) that is why the ABs can't be beaten'.
it's undeniable that we don't have quite the aggregate elite player stock of NZ. But we certainly do have a broad cadre of players that acquitted themselves well in the competitive cauldron of S14 which, at a provincial level, is far more competitive than any other equivalent rugby competition.
When posters here avoid the issue of coaching responsibilities, they seem to immediately revert to a default line of inquiry such as 'OK, tell me which other genius players we have that could be in this team, but aren't? We are putting the best on the park now and they aren't hacking it.' The central problem I have with this is that it contains the heavy implication that the role of coaching is almost solely, or very predominantly, that of selection, and, if the selection of player names is the best it could be, and the team fails, coaches can somehow abrogate, or diminish, responsibility for the outcome. Unfortunately, this simple thesis is not correct, or, if it is, we are paying far too much for Aus rugby coaches. Top coaches select yes, and this is highly important, but they also: develop player capability, design optimal player combinations, build psychological strength and productive team culture, motivate and guide, enhance (or correct) precise skill areas, design game plans and tactical schemes and effective training routines, set team goals, implement physical conditioning strategies, appoint key support coaches, apply applicable support technologies, etc, etc. All these parameters can and do bear upon the ultimate capacity of any particular group of players to succeed over time. And these parameters of coaching capability can matter as much as individual player quality and selection.
It's no co-incidence that the salaries paid to elite coaches in affluent, major team sports like diveball, USA basketball, ice hockey etc have gone up massively in the last 10+ years. The reason is simple: it's been proven over time that the best coaches can achieve transformative outcomes for teams, and can create the difference between many wins and many losses.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
You make some fair points Reds. I won't argue against the proposition that coaching is very important to team performance across all levels of the game. Clearly the most successful teams have the best coaches, if not always the most star players. So let's look at the alternatives to Deans who are available at the moment. Who would be the leading contenders? I'm not sure really. It wouldn't be none of Deans deputies, that's for sure. Could we go back to a system where one of the provincial coaches could also coach the Wallabies? That would leave the door open for Link or Macqueen, but in the professional era I'm not sure that would be acceptable. But who knows. I'm disinclined to get another foreign coach, not due to any anti-foreigner bias, but more to do with being in tune with the Australian rugby culture. In any case, there aren't many foreign coaches who are any better.
For my money one or more of the following three things have to change:
1, The playing personnel. If the current guys aren't cutting it and there are other guys who can, let them have a shot at it
2, The coaching personnel. Maybe this bunch aren't the right guys for the job. It happens in every organisation at some point, where the management aren't cut out for it or aren't leading the team well.
3, The game plan/training techniques. If the above aren't the problem, then perhaps our whole approach to test footy is wrong.
For my own part, I would say that the raw talent is there. The young guys we've seen come into the team in the last couple of years can play test footy. There is no doubt in my mind about that. Cooper, Genia, Pocock, O'Connor, Horwill, Polota-Nau and Alexander are all high quality players who should develop into world class players. There are a few others like Simmons and Horne who could develop into very good players themselves.
I also think Deans is a very good coach whose record at Super rugby level merited a shot at the job. Whether or not he's a great test coach I am not sure. At the moment, either his personality, leadership ability or game plan is not working with these guys. At some point the ARU needs to ask themselves which of the three things above is not getting the job done. They are all elite athletes and coaches and it is reasonable to expect the highest level of performance from them. If that's not what we are getting (it isn't), then one or more them has to go. I would be inclined to let the 3N run its course and make a decision on the player list and coaching staff at the end of it.
If we want to be competitive at next years world cup, we don't have a lot of time to sort this out. This years Spring tour and next years 3N is all we have to right the ship, so if changes are to be made they will need to be made soon.
For my money one or more of the following three things have to change:
1, The playing personnel. If the current guys aren't cutting it and there are other guys who can, let them have a shot at it
2, The coaching personnel. Maybe this bunch aren't the right guys for the job. It happens in every organisation at some point, where the management aren't cut out for it or aren't leading the team well.
3, The game plan/training techniques. If the above aren't the problem, then perhaps our whole approach to test footy is wrong.
For my own part, I would say that the raw talent is there. The young guys we've seen come into the team in the last couple of years can play test footy. There is no doubt in my mind about that. Cooper, Genia, Pocock, O'Connor, Horwill, Polota-Nau and Alexander are all high quality players who should develop into world class players. There are a few others like Simmons and Horne who could develop into very good players themselves.
I also think Deans is a very good coach whose record at Super rugby level merited a shot at the job. Whether or not he's a great test coach I am not sure. At the moment, either his personality, leadership ability or game plan is not working with these guys. At some point the ARU needs to ask themselves which of the three things above is not getting the job done. They are all elite athletes and coaches and it is reasonable to expect the highest level of performance from them. If that's not what we are getting (it isn't), then one or more them has to go. I would be inclined to let the 3N run its course and make a decision on the player list and coaching staff at the end of it.
If we want to be competitive at next years world cup, we don't have a lot of time to sort this out. This years Spring tour and next years 3N is all we have to right the ship, so if changes are to be made they will need to be made soon.
I avoided quoting your post, RH, to save bandwidth.
Sure, the coach will cop it in the neck once he has gone and the record of that time will be solely attributed to him - this is always the way.
Right now, the issue raised by yourself and others is that he has to go, now.
Right now, the other problem is that we have several very good and crucial players out, some for a while yet. We have other key players underperforming.
Some of out better players were brought in by Deans, obviously no credit can be attributed to that, since clearly the provincial coach who first saw them must be the genius.
You berate posters here for expecting players to take some blame. These guys don't pop into the Wallabies from nowhere, they should have a good skillset and a sense of application and committment before they get the Kooga jersey. And yet in many basic areas they underperform.
Most annoyingly, is this habit of labelling anyone who doesn't want a knee-jerk coach swap an apologist, a diehard or some other cute term. In fact many are questioning aspects of Deans' process - why certain players don't get considered, how the bench is not used etc...It is not all black and white.
I still fail to see how changing now will fix any of this. We will still be short at least 2 front-rowers, 2 locks, an 8, a 13, 2 wingers and a back up 15. Will Link pull these from his arse? Provided Link is the answer. Who else is a strong coaching candidate?
Sure, the coach will cop it in the neck once he has gone and the record of that time will be solely attributed to him - this is always the way.
Right now, the issue raised by yourself and others is that he has to go, now.
Right now, the other problem is that we have several very good and crucial players out, some for a while yet. We have other key players underperforming.
Some of out better players were brought in by Deans, obviously no credit can be attributed to that, since clearly the provincial coach who first saw them must be the genius.
You berate posters here for expecting players to take some blame. These guys don't pop into the Wallabies from nowhere, they should have a good skillset and a sense of application and committment before they get the Kooga jersey. And yet in many basic areas they underperform.
Most annoyingly, is this habit of labelling anyone who doesn't want a knee-jerk coach swap an apologist, a diehard or some other cute term. In fact many are questioning aspects of Deans' process - why certain players don't get considered, how the bench is not used etc...It is not all black and white.
I still fail to see how changing now will fix any of this. We will still be short at least 2 front-rowers, 2 locks, an 8, a 13, 2 wingers and a back up 15. Will Link pull these from his arse? Provided Link is the answer. Who else is a strong coaching candidate?
louie
Desmond Connor (43)
I's like to point out that coaching is a problem is a problem at super14 level in australia. Not just deans.
3 our 4 (reds being the odd ones out) of our teams are coached badly. Are all inconsistent andall lack mental toughness. Alot of these players show poor skill level at super14 team.
3 our 4 (reds being the odd ones out) of our teams are coached badly. Are all inconsistent andall lack mental toughness. Alot of these players show poor skill level at super14 team.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
That's not at all my point Cyclo. Above, I was talking about the positive, transformative power that IMO coaches can potentially impart way above and beyond the core players' talents chosen for a team. And thus just focussing on 'player selection and player attributes' is, IMO, relieving expensive, multi-season coaches of responsibility.
No, not what I have said anyway. What I have said is (a) Deans and the entire coaching staff should be v rigorously assessed from September 12, 2010 and and (b) my 'achievement marker' for RD as a 'minimum pass to get the benefit of the doubt (just)' is 3 Tris wins, with one an away win. I think that's more than fair, and bordering on the indulgent. If the '(b)' test is not passed, then IMO, the entire coaching staff should go, then. I note that many posters in this debate (esp RD supporters) do not offer up any precise 'achievement markers' at all, so it's impossible to objectively assess what they think RD should be outputting in results terms, or what measurable achievement really is in a modern Wallabies context.
I have in fact said RD should get credit for these 'promotions', but that (a) the flops should be considered as well, to get a balanced view, and (b) the key expectation I have is measurable results. Coaches' core job at a minimum is to find and promote the best players available in Australia. I just don't give huge, back-slapping credit for that. Others do.
Of course I expect v well paid players to perform. My argument is that I have often seen, IMO, too much attack directed at specific players, and too little at the coaches paid to select, develop and motivate them over multiple, sequential seasons. Btw, I wonder why so many of them seem to able to perform OK in S14, then become mistake-prone in the Wallabies? This should be at least discussed.
Wasn't it you Cyclo who counselled me re 'don't be over-sensitive to (Gagger's) pulling your chain'? You'll recall where the ambivalent (and not entirely flattering) phrase 'knee-jerk' started (and was directed I think at posters like Gnostic, Langthorne and me). But yes, I do see posters apologising (in effect) for coaches and giving them far too many get-outs and excuses after much (measurable) poor performance. IMO, a central aspect of this whole problem is that too many smart rugby patriots saw RD as 'the answer' when he arrived (given that stunning S14 record), hitched their hopes for the Wallabies to that star, and now 2.5 years later...... (btw, I was once a massive fan of RD's appointment, and had huge hopes for it).
Link is relevant candidate, who could deny that, but that's all he is. Other potential candidates (either now or in 2011) have been clearly identified in other threads here and in recent days.
RedsHappy
Tony Shaw (54)
Agree, and not discussed enough. And Link/Reds must prove they can get into the S15 2011 Finals.
- Status