Queensland Reds 2024

[dru]

Last season imo was the time for Thorn to lay a claim for a coaching extension. He failed to do so. That is a different statement to suggesting Thorn should have been removed before the 2023 season. Unless there was an obvious hi calibre candidate right then that clearly could not be replicated at a later time.

WB assistant coaches didn’t meet that threshold I think.

My objection is not about Thorn at the Reds in 23. It’s the thinking that Thorn should have had the chance to impress in 23 to the point that we should not have been looking for alternatives until 23 is done. That’s bollocks, Thorn had the chance to clear the decks last year and failed.

I’m hoping the Reds are many months into a search for the next HC. And after last week, I suspect the Reds should have removed the option for Thorn to re-apply.

 

[Derpus]

who the fuck even said they do?

The newspaper man

 

[Braveheart81]

My objection is not about Thorn at the Reds in 23. It’s the thinking that Thorn should have had the chance to impress in 23 to the point that we should not have been looking for alternatives until 23 is done. That’s bollocks, Thorn had the chance to clear the decks last year and failed.

I’m hoping the Reds are many months into a search for the next HC. And after last week, I suspect the Reds should have removed the option for Thorn to re-apply.

Looking for a replacement coach for 2024 during the 2023 season is fine. Thorn is free to interview for that as well.

It would have been very different if they'd made a play for Dan McKellar and Dan McKellar only in a very short window in late January/early February in the time between Eddie Jones was announced as Wallabies coach and McKellar announced he was resigning and had signed with Leicester.

There's a world of difference between searching for your next coach during the season and changing that process to a singular bid to appoint McKellar before you've commenced a proper process.

 

[qwerty51]

I think McKellar going to the English Premiership is a great move for his coaching career. If he has success there and potentially somewhere else he will be undeniable for an international job should he want it down the line. Sure, if he coached the Reds to success it would be good but he's had success in Australia and might want a change of scenery as well following a bumpy last 12 months with the Wallabies and Rugby Australia changes.

You're right, he'll look for an international job and likely it won't be with Australia. Like most coaching appointments - it's all about timing.

 

[dru]

Looking for a replacement coach for 2024 during the 2023 season is fine. Thorn is free to interview for that as well.

It would have been very different if they'd made a play for Dan McKellar and Dan McKellar only in a very short window in late January/early February in the time between Eddie Jones was announced as Wallabies coach and McKellar announced he was resigning and had signed with Leicester.

There's a world of difference between searching for your next coach during the season and changing that process to a singular bid to appoint McKellar before you've commenced a proper process.

I don't think I'm conceding anything to say I agree with this.

Thorn is cooked, that's not really a new scenario. We can only hope that the next HC involves a search beyond the Ballymore car park, and that they've been at it for some time.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

You're right, he'll look for an international job and likely it won't be with Australia. Like most coaching appointments - it's all about timing.

Maybe. Part of me wonders if Eddie will still be coach post Lions tour 2025. Will have to make a call to give a coach till 27 home RWC. Complete speculation but results will determine it.

 

[Dctarget]

but results will determine it.

you don't say

 

[Adam84]

The newspaper man

It didn’t say that “McReight and Wilson hold so much sway in how an entire franchise is run”, that’s just making shit up

 

[Derpus]

It didn’t say that “McReight and Wilson hold so much sway in how an entire franchise is run”, that’s just making shit up

Are you intentionally missing the point of my post or what?

Im just saying it would be stupid to let player sentiment (particularly these players) prevent the Union from approaching a potential coaching upgrade.

Doesnt really seem that controversial.

 

[Adam84]

Are you intentionally missing the point of my post or what?

Im just saying it would be stupid to let player sentiment (particularly these players) prevent the Union from approaching a potential coaching upgrade.

Doesnt really seem that controversial.

No player should hold the sway, but to name specific players and infer they hold the sway/have swayed how the franchise is run, is just unfounded crap.

Hence why I asked you where this was stated, and you claimed the newspaper.

 

[Derpus]

No player should hold the sway, but to name specific players and infer they hold the sway/have swayed how the franchise is run, is just unfounded crap.

Hence why I asked you where this was stated, and you claimed the newspaper.

Sorry you are right, the full list of current Wallabies in the Reds probably also includes McDermott and Petaia. And yes - it did imply that they hold so much sway that they wouldn't even countenance an approach.

But fuck it - its not worth arguing about. I have my own steaming pile of shite that calls itself a Union to worry about.

 

[Adam84]

Sorry, you are right. I should have provided a more exhaustive list of all the Wallabies in the Reds squad, extensive as it is.

Using examples is terribly disingenuous.

Naming specific individuals without grounds is disingenuous.

I don’t think that’s a controversial argument.

 

[7137]

Naming specific individuals without grounds is disingenuous.

I don’t think that’s a controversial argument.

Well he did say “guys like McReight and Wilson”. Which is simply just another (accurate) way of saying “the Reds current wallabies”

 

[Slim 293]

Well he did say “guys like McReight and Wilson”. Which is simply just another (accurate) way of saying “the Reds current wallabies”

Not exactly...

 

[7137]

Not exactly...

He was in the January training camp with Rennie. And the exchange referred to by Wayne Smith was in January.

 

[Doritos Day]

Players typically will back the incumbent. The downside to not doing so can be detrimental to careers. Players backing a coach in my eyes means that there probably isn’t anything wrong with the existing coach and his methods

Don't these statements contradict each other though?

If player are happy/comfortable with the status quo you could find there's plenty wrong and they're not being pushed hard enough or benefitting from falling standards which seemingly is exactly what happened in the Wallabies set-up.

 

[Wallaby Man]

Don't these statements contradict each other though?

If player are happy/comfortable with the status quo you could find there's plenty wrong and they're not being pushed hard enough or benefitting from falling standards which seemingly is exactly what happened in the Wallabies set-up.

No I think you can have it both ways. A player might not want to publicly state they don’t back to coach because of workplace friction from it. A player can also be satisfied with the leadership supplied but doesn’t mean new leadership couldn’t come in an change the status quo and take things to a new level, it could also easily go the other way. With the way high performance environments are designed and the numerous decision makers that surround them, it almost impossible not to be provided a satisfactory level of coaching and management in 2023, but doesn’t mean it’s the best in class.

I remember a conversation with AFL great Jason Akermanis where he said the difference in high performance environments is so minimal. The players are all roughly the same level of talent and the programs offer the same things, it’s the 1 percenters that differentiates the players and teams from each other.

 

[TryRugby]

Werchon?

 

[Spamnoodle]

Not really, we can’t keep everyone. Van Nek was coming through the system when we had what seemed to be a dominant forward pack and had just been to the Super AU final and then the following year won that comp. He was right to look for other opportunities.

As much as we hate to lose QLD products who then end up flourishing, no sporting organisation keeps 100% of their talent.

Except he was ripe for the choosing last year and we knew we were short on props at the time. Brumbies came calling late. It was a massive balls up. Again. Too much good talent slipping through the cracks. Usually to the ACT

 

[Jamie]

I think you're being harsh on Tate here. He did everything right (as did Daugunu who was positioned well). He had the ball in two hands and when he was getting close to needing to pass he was also switching his hips and starting to cut infield.

Muirhead was ultimately committed to Daugunu and the only way the try wouldn't have been scored at that point was if Tate had passed. He kept both options available until he knew where Muirhead was committed to.

Yeah, I guess you are right, I still think the Reds don't have the game plan to involve their wingers, and while I know they should be "looking" for work, you potentially have two wingers that can score lots of tries.

Ps: Where is the Bomb to Vunilalu, close to the try line?