Michael Cheika

[Brumby Runner]



Is Cheika flawed, absolutely, but no more or less than many people. Was he ultimately successful as Wallabies coach, no. Did I find his approach to post match press conferences frustrating at times as a fan, for sure. Do I think it is the right thing that he is gone now, absolutely. All that said, I also think he did some real good (2015 RWC for example) and had some successes that people seem quick to sweep away now without acknowledging the context of some broader challenges.



In 2015, Cheika inherited Link's team for the RWC. Much ado was made at the time that he shouldn't be judged until he had the opportunity to develop his own squad. In the event, his best result ever was with another coach's team and as soon as he had the opportunity to make the team his own, the results just went southward. In retrospect, we can see that he weakened the Wallabies by discarding the likes of Scott Fardy and McMahon while bringing in and persevering with his favourite under-performers like Hanigan and Foley. On top of that, he brought players back from overseas who never achieved at the highest level. That must have had an unsettling affect on at least some of the local squad members.

All in all, the credit Cheika gets for the final appearance at RWC 2015 is misplaced. His influence on the national team has always been negative and he has not earned any right to respect for his efforts over the whole of his tenure.

 

[Lorenzo]

We were the recipients of some pretty immense luck in the 79th minute against Scotland in 2015. I know, that stuff comes and goes, but given Joubert got it wrong, it could very easily have been a 1/4 final exit. It's a game of inches in some respects, but he definitely wasn't unlucky that night.

 

[RedsHappy]

In 2015, Cheika inherited Link's team for the RWC. Much ado was made at the time that he shouldn't be judged until he had the opportunity to develop his own squad. In the event, his best result ever was with another coach's team and as soon as he had the opportunity to make the team his own, the results just went southward. In retrospect, we can see that he weakened the Wallabies by discarding the likes of Scott Fardy and McMahon while bringing in and persevering with his favourite under-performers like Hanigan and Foley. On top of that, he brought players back from overseas who never achieved at the highest level. That must have had an unsettling affect on at least some of the local squad members.

All in all, the credit Cheika gets for the final appearance at RWC 2015 is misplaced. His influence on the national team has always been negative and he has not earned any right to respect for his efforts over the whole of his tenure.

The other huge 'luck' factor for the Cheika Wallabies in RWC2015 being that England was at that crucial moment in a total mess, all of it, selections, attack structure, lack of coherent coaching, etc. As soon as England became better coached and selected in 2016, they came to Australian shores no less and humiliated us 0-3. But the Cheika love just went on nonetheless, that appalling result was largely seen to be 'a learning experience that we will grow from'. (Honestly, the 'observer and analysis gestalt' around Australian rugby had by then just grown so dumb and lazy, drugs were better than real life.)

The Cheika lovers and apologists (few and far between now, funny about that) always neglect to make any rigorous analysis of the contextual circumstances that aided the Wallaby outcomes in RWC 2015. Yes, it was Cheika's best ever Tests result so congrats but its foundations were relatively unique and unlikely to be repeated in later competitive contexts and periods.

Edit, added later. In the type of argument zones as above, Mark Ella IMO makes some great observations re the role of RWC 2015 in the evolving Cheika debacle-land and beyond, one of his best:

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sp...d/news-story/87e84ccbb7e260fbe81471e03e32bb39

 

[molman]

No, I didn't do any of those things. I said that there are numerous reasons for having enjoyed (loved, even) working with or under someone and that those feelings can occur in an environment where that person has not acheived what they are paid to achieve. To be more specific - i don't believe there's a standard correlation between coaches that people love playing for and coaches that are successful.

I feel like you are reframing what you originally said somewhat, but if this is what you indeed did mean, I don't disagree, but I don't think it relates and that you are also reframing what I'm saying. Players are saying he is the best coach they have had, not the one they loved or liked as you keep saying but that they genuinely rated him as a coach in comparison to others.

And to be as clear, i'll say that my response to that is 'so what?' I don't care. It doesn't tell me anything, other than that the players who say that had a good time. Good for them.

Was he getting 1.2m a year to make friends with the playing group? We may have overpaid.

I would have thought a clear point of data from individuals who would know a lot better would be valid of consideration.

In 2015, Cheika inherited Link's team for the RWC.

I would have thought he inherited the Australian team and very much implemented his own approach to the 2015 campaign in stark contrast to the approach Link likely would have taken. I think you are being a little dismissive of what occured.

...immense luck in the 79th minute against Scotland in 2015.... It's a game of inches in some respects, but he definitely wasn't unlucky that night.

Sliding doors. You can always point to a moment of percieved 'luck' in many games for a lot of coaches.

Anyway I clearly see there is slim chance of any sense of a balanced discussion. I've said my piece. Like I said, I appreciate the passion people have for the Wallabies, but some that is being said is a bit much. I actually thought the piece Cheika wrote for Players Voice showed some class (https://www.athletesvoice.com.au/michael-cheika-farewell-players-fans/)

 

[molman]

...neglect to make any rigorous analysis of the contextual circumstances that aided the Wallaby outcomes ...

Every game is contextual, including some of our other success and failures, thats why you need to look at trends and the fact is that Cheika's trends were poor, hence why he has unarguably not been a very successful Wallabies coach overall.

It's also why I think some of the other trends in our game need some considered focus and consideration as well.

 

[RedsHappy]

Every game is contextual, including some of our other success and failures, thats why you need to look at trends and the fact is that Cheika's trends were poor, hence why he has unarguably not been a very successful Wallabies coach overall.

It's also why I think some of the other trends in our game need some considered focus and consideration as well.

The point you seem to evade (and that I was indirectly getting at, however tangentially) is the decisive role getting the Wallabies to the RWC 2015 GF played in Cheika's standing, bargaining power, and contract engagement process with the then ARU (along with his then much-elevated HC reputation)......and the rest is history.

I credit Ella here as he so shrewdly observed in that piece of his I linked, it was the RWC 2015 outcome that very definitely vaulted Cheika (voted 'Coach of the 2015 Year') from an ARU contract that, prior to that attainment, ended up in 2017 to one that, right after that attainment, ended in late 2019.

A contract for him that remained terminable in 2017 may well have opened the then credible, then desirable, option of not renewing it and instead hiring a new Wallaby coaching team from late 2017 onwards.

As Ella only half-jokingly says, that Joubert penalty on minute 79 vs Scotland in RWC 2015 may well have been responsible for everything that came later in Wallaby-land, and everything that unfolded in Oita last weekend.

 

[molman]

The point you seem to evade (and that I was indirectly getting at, however tangentially) ....

Not evading, just not sure of the value of going down a what-if. Reality is what it is. You could likely pick apart a lot of sporting situations where history could have gone a different direction based on some outcome or another. There are a lot of decisions that ARU/RA have made over their history that you could question with the benefit of hindsight.

I can't read the article (no sub) so I will have to see what Ella says exactly when I can.

 

[Lorenzo]

I feel like you are reframing what you originally said somewhat, but if this is what you indeed did mean, I don't disagree, but I don't think it relates and that you are also reframing what I'm saying. Players are saying he is the best coach they have had, not the one they loved or liked as you keep saying but that they genuinely rated him as a coach in comparison to others.

I would have thought a clear point of data from individuals who would know a lot better would be valid of consideration.

Apologies.

"Players are saying he is the best coach they have had"

Ok, fine. I still do not give a shit. If i'm analyzing a coach's performance as the coach hirer and firer, and his results have been unacceptable over the long term, do you think I am going to have significant regard to the players (players that have obtained significant financial windfalls as a result of him picking them) coming in and telling me they think he's the best coach theyve had? I mean, i'd listen to what they have to say, but at the end of the day, the results are not there right?

Similarly, if he was at 75%, and the players told me he was a fluffybunny, I would probably tell them to tell their story walking unless he was acting inappropriately.

I noticed that you've not mentioned Curtis Rona and Quade Cooper - who were not so complimentary. Presumably you explain away their remarks as being those of jilted ex-wallabies not selected as often as they'd have liked? Can I not say the same about the players he picked? That they are complimenting him out of appreciation for their continued selection?

There's also the matter of: he is best compared to who? Daryl Gibson? Wessels? Stiles? Now that I think about, he probably is the best coach they've had.

Sliding doors. You can always point to a moment of percieved 'luck' in many games for a lot of coaches.

Yes, and Cheika never had a problem bitching about the ref, right? A phantom kickable penalty with a minute to go when you are down by 2 in a RWC 1/4 is on the fortuitous end of the scale, I would say. And that turned out to be a pivotal moment in his career.

 

[molman]

@Lorenzo, I'm not going to keep going back and forward. Let's just say we have very different views of how to reflect on an individual and I just believe constructive criticism can be had without sinking so low as some of the discussion has.

. . .and to answer your question, no I don't discount Quade's comment, though at this stage it is a bit of an outlier, and I'm not sure Rona has much perspective with what, 3? Wallaby appearances.

 

[Viking]

@Lorenzo, I'm not going to keep going back and forward. Let's just say we have very different views of how to reflect on an individual and I just believe constructive criticism can be had without sinking so low as some of the discussion has.

.and to answer your question, no I don't discount Quade's comment, though at this stage it is a bit of an outlier, and I'm not sure Rona has much perspective with what, 3? Wallaby appearances.

I'm with Lorenzo. A few players coming out in support of Cheika saying he was "the best coach they ever had" just goes to show how much support and care he gave them - not so much his results as a coach- which is clear looking at this poor win ratio and lack of skills development in players.

I work in Finance, and you know who I think the best manager I ever had was? the one who supported me and showed she cared. But did she get the best out of me as a worker? No. That was the arrogant prick which I hated but I actually worked harder for so I wouldn't get yelled at. Sure I prefer working for the nice manager but in reality the one I hated was more effective.

Everyone loves their leaders to show they care which Cheika is clearly great at but at the end of the day that is just a small part of what makes a good coach.

 

[barbarian]

Think the odds of Eddie being our next coach just got a lot longer.

 

[RedsHappy]

Rennie v Jones

Very amusing

 

[RedsHappy]

Think the odds of Eddie being our next coach just got a lot longer.

If true that Rennie appointed to Wallabies, why oh fucking why did RA not wait until the RWC was over, keep their powder dry and assess options then.

And pay whatever it took (yes, I mean that, the stakes for Aust rugby are simply massive) to get the very best possible HC from those available in late 2019.

 

[molman]

If true that Rennie appointed to Wallabies, why oh fucking why did RA not wait until the RWC was over, keep their powder dry and assess options then.

And pay whatever it took (yes, I mean that, the stakes for Aust rugby are simply massive) to get the very best possible HC from those available in late 2019.

I don't disagree, but you'd have to think England will lock down Jones (still on contract post RWC as is), Japan will lock down Jamie Joseph unless he thinks he's a chance at the AB position, so who is it that you'd be going after? Schmidt (who has said he wants a break at least for the next 6mo and has moved back to NZ for his family)? Whoever doesn't get the AB gig?. . . I get the impression Gatland will commit to Chiefs (signed a 4 year deal after all) even if he doesn't get the AB position and he has the Lions coming up. . .

. . .I mean the only other seemingly valid names floating around are Vern Cotter and Jake White unless there is some assistant coach like John Mitchell or Scott Wisemantel that you think is ready for the step up. . . or even Larkham who I personally feel would benefit from some more time at Munster as he didn't show me enough at the Brumbies to say he's ready. Heck, would people give Robbie Deans another go. . . theres a funny thought

 

[gel]

I think Jones would be a mistake for the wallabies... again.

England and Japanese rugby culture is just all kinds of different. He'll get the aussie players offside just like he did last time and they'll not respond. He will also not have the benefit of a 10/12 that can do every illegal thing (head highs, shoulder charges, stomps in the ruck, elbow bends etc) in the book and not get penalised for it.

 

[mark_s]

Why would Eddie come back to Aus rugby? He can earn more elsewhere, and probably with less downside. He coached us to a RWC final, its hard to top that. I think it’s time to move on

 

[Adam84]

Why would Eddie come back to Aus rugby? He can earn more elsewhere, and probably with less downside. He coached us to a RWC final, its hard to top that. I think it’s time to move on

I dont think Eddie has ever been driven purely by financial gain

 

[Rugrat]

I wonder if Cheika even watched England V All Blacks game last night and thought fuck analysis of the opposition might be worth a go.

 

[Lorenzo]

I wonder if Cheika even watched England V All Blacks game last night and thought fuck analysis of the opposition might be worth a go.

Or devoting the occasional resource to defence?

But no. His response would be fuck England really is that good, we would have beaten the ABs too and we are basically deserved to be ranked 2nd. Then we beat England in 15 so we really deserve to be ranked 1

 

[Quick Hands]

I wonder if Cheika even watched England V All Blacks game last night and thought fuck analysis of the opposition might be worth a go.

If he had watched he would have seen how a game plan could be structured to win. He might have also noticed that England ran the ball quite a bit - but mostly when it was the right option, as opposed to a mindless 'we're going to run the ball from everywhere, regardless of the conditions, the opposition, the score, the balance of the game or the circumstances' type approach.

Just wonder what all those posters who lined up 5 years ago and said that Eddie Jones couldn't coach are feeling about now.