Richard Graham to quit the Force and join the Reds
- Thread starter barbarian
- Start date
- Status
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
That does not follow in these circumstances. Good on the players. Kind of proves the spiritual leader theory I mentioned.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Bruce Ross
Ken Catchpole (46)
ChargerWA
Mark Loane (55)
They revolted against a coach who had given up on them.
Andy Friend died a death of a thousand cuts from over egoed players constantly eroding his leadership.
The two couldn't be more different.......
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
I wasn't being completely serious when I posted that... but in hindsight there's not much difference between this and what's happened at the Brumbies in the past...
The Force players banded together to have their contacted coach sacked...
The fact that Graham is going to coach another team next year is just a different excuse...
I expect an article from Spiro next week tying Force player power with George Gregan, maybe Matt Giteau, and the Packer led rebel league that failed...
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
Right decision made for mine. RG's position is untenable after quitting on these guys and I'm hoping that it will galvanise them as a group. I can't see anything whatsoever to be gained from a situation where you know your leadership is buggering off elsewhere, yet you have to listen to them for another few months. Open revolt within five minutes is the usual result or at least passive resistance. I think the majority of Force fans will be forgiving.
Bruce Ross
Ken Catchpole (46)
I'm still filthy on that and I don't even know the bloke. His only consolation was that he didn't have to keep living at Acapulco-by-the-Lake. That almost made it worth getting speared.
.
The Red Baron
Chilla Wilson (44)
Expect him to pin it on Gregan, as he is the RUPA rep on the ARU board... I'm sure old mate Spiro will make some sort of tenuous connection.
Either that, or Giteau is meddling in the Force affairs from France, out of loyalty to a club he hasn't played for for quite some time.
As for Packer, expect a zombie tv mogul apocalypse.
M
Moono75
Guest
My two cents worth. The Force players didn't instigate the sacking. RG made his call, Rugby WA said we will allow you to finish out the season if the players are in agreement. The players were not. Goodbye RG. Can't get more democratic than that. RG made his bed now sleep in it. Totally different situation to the Brumbies who banded together to get the coach sacked because they just didn't like him. That said the Brumbies are actually on a good path under Jake White. Very intersted in their game tomorrow against the Bulls.
Reds game tonight dissapointing. They have lost their mojo. Mike Harris come to the Force.
Reds game tonight dissapointing. They have lost their mojo. Mike Harris come to the Force.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Actually, it's because the senior players had lost confidence in him because he wasn't doing a very good job...
waratahjesus
Greg Davis (50)
@Slim - slightly different tangent.
But after the player power problems at the brumbies (not sure were you sit on the issue altogether) do you find it strange that a new era under Jake white has Stephen Larkham and Gregan there in positions of power still?
But after the player power problems at the brumbies (not sure were you sit on the issue altogether) do you find it strange that a new era under Jake white has Stephen Larkham and Gregan there in positions of power still?
M
Moono75
Guest
...didn't like him...didn't like his coaching style....didn't like this game plan.....in the end it comes down to a player instigated removal of the coach. In the Force instance the players only had their say after the fact. Completely different circumstance. The Force players were not complicit in initiating the removal.
Riptide
Dave Cowper (27)
RG said he was leaving in a bit, players just told him to leave now. It seems that the culture that RG spent so much time in inculcating had so little room for him in the end.
I just listened to the G&G podcast and the discussion wrt to RG. I think they followed the corporate Reds line, hook sinker and all.
There is a reason significant succession planning does not take place in rugby, or ANY other professional team sport. Take $billion dollar professional sport franchises in baseball, NFL, basketball and soccer; in each, the only culture that matters is a winning one. Getting bums on the seats and eyeballs on the screens is a part of it, but that's marketing and outreach. Securing a proven winner as coach, or one that has clearly demonstrated the ability to be a winner at lower levels, is critical in driving a winning culture. It's not a guarantee of future success but it's a bloody good start. So when top sporting organizations lose a winning coach, they seek to replace him with the very best they can find.
Any coach with that driven, winning mentality is unlikely to serve as understudy to asume the reins down the road. I can't think of a single instance in any sport where a proven winner has come onboard as part of a succession planning or team transition process and served beneath the existing coach for a season. As in business, some assistants seem for the manor born and may be groomed for leadership but that's not what has happened at the Reds.
I'd argue that RG has not demonstrated that he can win at Super level. He has won just 7 games out of 26 while heading the Force. Jake White is a winning coach and he has shown that once again at the Brumbies where he has transformed that team. RG may be a lovely bloke, and a decent coach but he hasnt excelled in coaching a winning team even though he has been great in getting the players to show up at clinics for kids etc., and his efforts have dovetailed nicely with an effort to sell tickets and promote the franchise.
To coach a team that is wins trophies consistently year in and year out requires a special team culture and a special coach. For me that's a given. The Crusaders, Leicester, Munster, Toulouse, Leinster all have it. With Ewen McKenize, the Reds now have a coach who clearly no longer wants to coach the Reds, whether he gets the Wallabies role or not. He has other ambitions - absolutely his prerogative. What irritates the crap out me is that the Reds will now will have a coach going forward that is NOT the best they could find; he is simply one comfortable in playing 2nd fiddle to McKenzie for a season or so.
This is a very poor decision by the Reds.
I just listened to the G&G podcast and the discussion wrt to RG. I think they followed the corporate Reds line, hook sinker and all.
There is a reason significant succession planning does not take place in rugby, or ANY other professional team sport. Take $billion dollar professional sport franchises in baseball, NFL, basketball and soccer; in each, the only culture that matters is a winning one. Getting bums on the seats and eyeballs on the screens is a part of it, but that's marketing and outreach. Securing a proven winner as coach, or one that has clearly demonstrated the ability to be a winner at lower levels, is critical in driving a winning culture. It's not a guarantee of future success but it's a bloody good start. So when top sporting organizations lose a winning coach, they seek to replace him with the very best they can find.
Any coach with that driven, winning mentality is unlikely to serve as understudy to asume the reins down the road. I can't think of a single instance in any sport where a proven winner has come onboard as part of a succession planning or team transition process and served beneath the existing coach for a season. As in business, some assistants seem for the manor born and may be groomed for leadership but that's not what has happened at the Reds.
I'd argue that RG has not demonstrated that he can win at Super level. He has won just 7 games out of 26 while heading the Force. Jake White is a winning coach and he has shown that once again at the Brumbies where he has transformed that team. RG may be a lovely bloke, and a decent coach but he hasnt excelled in coaching a winning team even though he has been great in getting the players to show up at clinics for kids etc., and his efforts have dovetailed nicely with an effort to sell tickets and promote the franchise.
To coach a team that is wins trophies consistently year in and year out requires a special team culture and a special coach. For me that's a given. The Crusaders, Leicester, Munster, Toulouse, Leinster all have it. With Ewen McKenize, the Reds now have a coach who clearly no longer wants to coach the Reds, whether he gets the Wallabies role or not. He has other ambitions - absolutely his prerogative. What irritates the crap out me is that the Reds will now will have a coach going forward that is NOT the best they could find; he is simply one comfortable in playing 2nd fiddle to McKenzie for a season or so.
This is a very poor decision by the Reds.
Garry Owen
Chris McKivat (8)
I , like many others I'm guessing, are wondering did the egg come before the chicken, over in the West?
Was the decision to remove him a result of player uncomfortability with his public decision to go to the Reds?
Or did Richard hear the hallroom whispers and the sound of sharpening knives building from the Forces bad performances?
All of this happening in the space of a week, it all seems too clinical. Like it was orchistrated before hand by all concerned for a hungry rugby public.
Was the decision to remove him a result of player uncomfortability with his public decision to go to the Reds?
Or did Richard hear the hallroom whispers and the sound of sharpening knives building from the Forces bad performances?
All of this happening in the space of a week, it all seems too clinical. Like it was orchistrated before hand by all concerned for a hungry rugby public.
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
Ah. Listening to the podcast, you would have got the invitation to post in the forum, open to anyone who disagreed. Absolutely a prerogative to do so, and you are even allowed to overreach.
We all know that sizeable doses of 'management-speak' (i.e. bullshit) accompany these sorts of 'franchise' exit and entry announcements. The Force certainly met these expectations last week, and the Reds really outperformed.
Yes, succession planning in pro sports is laced with pitfalls. Managing the off-field factors, such as bums on seats and eyeballs the screens, is not too dissimilar to many other businesses; but the on-field matters of winning and losing tend to be a zero-sum game, and are much less forgiving.
That means succession plans won't always work out as intended, but that doesn't make them a waste of time. On the contrary, the included process of mentoring and coaching of coaches is vital to the health of the game. Without it, knowledge is lost and the wheel has to be reinvented. In the NFL now, the 'Coaching tree' concept, linking former assistant coaches to their former head coach, is front and centre. All 32 active head coaches trace their roots back through generations to three prominent earlier coaches (Bill Walsh, Bill Parcells, and Marty Schottenheimer). Most of these coaches learn their trade and then succeed to another team, and some transition directly into the old boss's job.
But either way, all NFL head coaches with that driven, winning mentality, have served as an understudy.
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
Lets' take a look at a few of these $billion dollar professional sports and see if they've hired any coaches with that driven, winning mentality, starting as an understudy:-
- Basketball: Phil Jackson was an ex-NBA player who did a year or three coaching in Puerto Rico before being hired by the Chicago Bulls in 1987 as an assistant coach under Doug Collins. He coached Michael Jordan and a rookie Scottie Pippen in the NBA playoffs with Walsh. -- Promoted to head coach of the Bulls in 1989 and won 6 NBA titles in nine years at the club, including the 1996-1998 "three-peat".
- Basketball: Pat Riley was an ex-NBA player working in the media when hired by the Los Angeles Lakers in 1980 as assistant to new coach Paul Westhead, after Jack McKinney suffered a near-fatal bike accident. Was part of the NBA title win by LA that year. -- Riley was promoted to Head Coach of the Lakers in 1981. Won 5 NBA titles over the next nine years, including back-to-back in 1987 and 1988.
- NFL: George Seifert was a college-level football coach with a 6-18 record when hired by the San Francisco 49ers in 1980 as an assistant under Bill Walsh. Won Super Bowls with Walsh in 1981, 1984 and 1988. -- Promoted to head coach of the 49ers in 1989 and won two Super Bowls (1989 and 1994) within the next five years.
- Baseball: Tommy Lasorda was a retired baseball player who managed a team in Venezuala and had four good years in the minor-leagues when hired as the Third Base Coach by the Los Angeles Dodgers in 1973 under Walter Alston. Won a divisional title under Alston in 1974. -- Promoted to Dodgers Manager in 1976 and won four league pennants, eight division titles, and two World Series championships (1982 and 1988) in his 20 year career.
- Soccer: Louis van Gaal was retired football player with two years assistant-coaching experience at a smaller club when hired by AFC Ajax in 1988 as an assistant to Leo Beenhakker. He was involved in the league championship win finishing ahead of PSV Einhoven in 1990 (although Dutch hooligans kept them out of UEFA Cup). -- Promoted to Ajax Manager in 1991 and won three more league titles over the next five years, plus a UEFA Cup in 1992, Euro Champions League title in 1995, and a UEFA Super cup in 1995.
Gnostic
Mark Ella (57)
I wonder if the QRU and Link believe that the Qld players will not talk to their WA mates and discuss RG. Do they think that their mates opinions on the bloke mean nothing? Do they think that even though these are professionals if they don't like or respect somebody they will be receptive to coaching and messages from them. Indeed personality was quoted earlier in this thread as a key reason for RG's selection. I would suggest the manner of his recruitment, whilst under contract regardless of clauses, in the middle of the season and whilst negotiating contracts on behalf of the Force speaks of a lack of integrity and demonstrates negative aspects of that personality to all and sundry. Consider how a player who RG contracted to the Force would feel hearing that the coach who encouraged his signing is leaving to be involved with winning players and culture. Would you question whether the coach was pissing in you pocket with all those statements regarding you ability during the negoitations and your place in the squad as it is obvious the coach didn't want you as part of his new "winning side".
- Status