Robbie Deans

[08umema]

Consider yourself corrected. We have done it quite a few times, including this years 3Ns.

I should have added the words 'in a row'. However as I type this I realise that we beat SA, NZ and then Italy. Exercise in futility!

 

[matty_k]

2011 - South Africa, New Zealand and then Italy.

 

[Antony]

And now you've got to go South Africa, New Zealand and a lucky-dip six nations side. Not a bad precedent.

 

[08umema]

And now you've got to go South Africa, New Zealand and a lucky-dip six nations side. Not a bad precedent.

Sounds easy enough... I will just take a spare pair of undies with me wherever I watch the game on Sunday. I'll be shitting myself everytime Steyn sets up for a penalty

 

[Nusadan]

If we beat the Saffies on Sunday, that'll be 3 wins in a row, innit?

 

[08umema]

If we beat the Saffies on Sunday, that'll be 3 wins in a row, innit?

Bloody hope so!

 

[08umema]

Ok I have given myself a time-out for the stupidity of my remarks on page 8. Starting.... Now.

 

[fatprop]

This interview was on the Rugby Club last night

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/r...o-e6frf4pu-1226166559553?subcat=1225864525308

I liked the sentiment about the mental/belief side of rugby/sport from Deans

It adds to a comment Campese said on the Times RWC podcast suggest all these guys in the RWC semis are pretty well equally fit, the rest of it is down to attitude.

 

[Gnostic]

This interview was on the Rugby Club last night

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/r...o-e6frf4pu-1226166559553?subcat=1225864525308

I liked the sentiment about the mental/belief side of rugby/sport from Deans

It adds to a comment Campese said on the Times RWC podcast suggest all these guys in the RWC semis are pretty well equally fit, the rest of it is down to attitude.

Funny he (Deans) should talk about it. Redshappy has talked about the "hard mind" and other aspects of Sports Psychology for the last few years and has posted here extensively on the subject, most often lamenting the lack of it at Wallaby level. I have to agree with RH, in general though last weekend the defence (which is so much about attitude) told a huge story about where their attitude was for that game. It does explain why there are the inexplicable ups and down throughout Deans' tenure and the results such as against Samoa, England, NZ and Scotland where they just didn't show up.

I would add too that tactics and how it best uses talent has a huge bearing on results and ties back into the confidence of the side. The Boks for mine last week were over confident that they could bash their way through the Wallaby defence and even with such overwhelming territory and possession statistics they couldn't get through. Were they arrogantly overconfident? Why didn't they think to try something different? Did they have no confidence in any other plan? They certainly had the talent to try something different.

 

[fatprop]

I think it is more that they are babies in test terms and are still learning to "turn up" for every game.

but there are signs of the them learning

 

[08umema]

I think it is more that they are babies in test terms and are still learning to "turn up" for every game.

but there are signs of the them learning

But at what point do they become 'veteran' test players? When the group starts winning consistently?

 

[RedsHappy]

I think it is more that they are babies in test terms and are still learning to "turn up" for every game.

but there are signs of the them learning

Observation: The 'babies' of the Wales team (younger on average than the Wallabies) are managing to 'turn up' for every single one of their WC games. They haven't had 'an Ireland moment', or the lapses v Russia in 2H.

 

[Ruggo]

Observation: The 'babies' of the Wales team (younger on average than the Wallabies) are managing to 'turn up' for every single one of their WC games. They haven't had 'an Ireland moment', or the lapses v Russia in 2H.

Our babies tend to be a bit cocky at times. Your observation of the Welsh is one of the things I admire most about them.

 

[FANATIC]

But at what point do they become 'veteran' test players? When the group starts winning consistently?

Being a "veteran" seems to see a Wallaby dropped from the 'Deans experiment'.

 

[fatprop]

But at what point do they become 'veteran' test players? When the group starts winning consistently?

To me, it is when they turn up mentally for each game, when they keep their structure under pressure and/or when they are winning easily.

The winning is what follows

 

[Ruggo]

But at what point do they become 'veteran' test players? When the group starts winning consistently?

When they take all the learnings and profits of knowledge and apply them on a consitant basis moving forward, meeting the demands of test rugby.

 

[08umema]

When they take all the learnings and profits of knowledge and apply them on a consitant basis moving forward, meeting the demands of test rugby.

I can't recall if this is so, but do we have a full-time sports psychologist for this very reason?

 

[Groucho]

But at what point do they become 'veteran' test players? When the group starts winning consistently?

We could do worse than look to Bob Dwyer for an answer to that. It can never be right to focus on outcomes. Get the execution right and success will follow. This group of players will be veteran test players when they consistently get the execution right. Then they will be very hard to beat for any opposition.

 

[08umema]

We could do worse than look to Bob Dwyer for an answer to that. It can never be right to focus on outcomes. Get the execution right and success will follow. This group of players will be veteran test players when they consistently get the execution right. Then they will be very hard to beat for any opposition.

I'd definitely like to hear his opinion on it. Still amazes me that he does an article every week or so for GAGR. Nice bloke.

 

[Ruggo]

I can't recall if this is so, but do we have a full-time sports psychologist for this very reason?

I think you missed my sarcasim and attempted Deans speak.