However, I look at what Deans has done along the way and I ask "what can I see that I reckon he's obviously done wrong", and more often that not, I find especially when it comes to selection, he's done about right and far better than his previous two predecessors.
That is a good start, but comparing him to Eddie Jones or Connolly is not exactly raising the bar high. Maybe it is unfair to compare Deans to MacQueen, the best ever Wallaby coach. On the other hand it is more constructive than comparing him to Eddie Jones or Connolly, as I'm sure we all want the best for the Wallabies, not just someone who is better than an average to poor coach. I am not saying sack the guy, just wanting to discuss what he has or hasn't done well.
When starting the job he had some advantages (very good playing depth and talent, the return of John O'Neil - always chuckle to myself when I think of him in "a week in the life of" in "Gold") and also some disadvantages (mainly a team that was not delivering on the field).
Because what I think he's done is consistently make the tough calls, based on what's good for the Wallabies in the 2-3 year time frame, not the next game.
-It is possible to do both, see your example of those outstanding young halves Rod MacQueen blooded-
Examples:
- Tuqiri - did LT have a season or two left? Now we have Diggers, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and Hynes all with a bunch of caps because of the space he made
-A great call. I never rated him for philosophical (an over paid mungo convert) and rugby (wasn't up to the task for me) reasons, but putting that aside. the guy takes up one spot, not 3, so having him around need not have been a stumbling block. That said, I don't miss him.
- Giteau - didn't automatically make him VC and has slid him out from the 10 spot Giteau had nailed his colours to in favour of a young talented freak (QC (Quade Cooper)) who Deans has undeniably had a big effect on
-Basic coaching tenet - pick your best team, there are no garaunteed places. If QC (Quade Cooper) has an unexplicable loss of form I would hope that the new best option would get the spot (but this is an area that Deans doesn't excel in - reversing a bad decision when he is wrong)
- JOC (James O'Connor) - kid was too young last year, but now we have a young supertalent with 15 caps who's been round the block
-He could have been introduced just as effectively without showing him up
- Waugh - see Tuqiri, add in Pocock and Hodgson
-Pocock was an exceptional talent and an obvious choice from early on in his career based on his s14 form (see blogs and posts on this site), and Hodgson has had a great s14. I would argue that Waugh still has plenty to offer even as a mentor in the Baa Baas team (and surely a better captain than Hoiles)
- Mortlock - Eased out of captain so he could be put out to pasture this year. Now AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), Horne and even Chambers all have a shot
-If someone is injured they can't play, so other options need to be found. My issue here is that I suspect that if Mortlock (by some miracle) is fit and in great form next s15 season (ie the best Aussie 13) Deans still wouldn't select him
- Baxter - gave the guy a fair shot, but when it was obvious refs weren't gonna change, Dingo made the big call and binned him. We now have Benny A developing nicely.
-If Alexander is better he deserves the spot. It is the 'binning' I have an issue with. Some highlights from that decision have been seen over the last couple of weeks, such as 2 penalty tries and four young Aussie front rowers tarnished. Based on s14 form Baxter should be in the squad.
- Genia - Went from second string QLD 9 to best half back in world in one season, because Deans gave him a crack
-Just because Deans gave him a crack? Would giving Holmes a crack make him the best halfback in the world? Genia was the best player available for his position, certainly within the top 3 for squad selection purposes. I am very happy to see him in the team, not because he might be the best in 2-3 years time, but because he is the best now.
I reckon most other Coach/selectors would have been eking the last out of those old names above (and others) and who knows, maybe winning a few more games. But each time he's made the tough choice.
No clearer example than the front row against the poms last week. Was/am I comfortable with it? No. Has Deans just put 3 more names on the Wallaby mix - you can't deny it.
In the Wallaby miix? More like the England mincer.
It was a tough call, it was an unexpected call, it was also a bad call. Making tough calls is not necessarily a virtue.
The fascination with youth is mystifying to me. We know it didn't work out for the All Blacks under Mitchell (with Deans). We know that the best and most succesful coaches/managers in all international sports combine experience with youth, rather than favouring one or the other (in essence they pick their best available team, with squad rotation a factor, and gradually introduce the majority of their young talent. In exceptional cases a youngster bursts in as the best player for their position - Campese, Wayne Rooney, Tendulkar etc). Connolly went for experience over talent to his detriment (not his only problem, but one of them). On occassion Deans has gone the other way, with the Win/Loss ratio reflecting that. Deans' option is the better of the two, for the reasons you (and others) mention, but I don't believe it is the best option (note that he did not employ this policy with his successful Crusaders teams).
I'm trying to think of a reason why Deans would go this way, and when it doesn't work out, why he doesn't adjust his squad/plan/attitude (dare I say it - 'play what is in front of him'!). I think the best managers (not just in sport) tend to get results, be able to identify problems and remedy them, work with a variety of personalities (and ages), are able to build on what is good rather than simply throw everything out and start again, are able to identify the best assistants and delegate accordingly, are prepared to adjust or reverse their position when required, are realistic in their assessment of themselves and others, and are prepared to take responsibility for their actions. I might also add honesty and the ability to communicate, but they are implicit in a number of the others.
In some of those areas Deans falls short - particularly in results to date, ability (and preparedness) to draw the best out of players of all ages (he has done it with youth), to play the best players available even if it requires a willingness to adjust when the need arises.
As a result, we have had some brilliant play and glimpses of precocious youth. We have also seen occassions where naivity was undone, grizzled old heads were not to be found when needed, promising starts were undone by experience, and a couple of unnecessary personal and aggregate disasters.
.
