Robbie Deans

[Swarley]

So do we all think that Deans never had a proper "game plan" while coaching the Crusaders as well or just while he has been coaching the Wallabies?

I think the game plan at the Saders was clear. Belt it down field into touch and win the ball back. It was obvious, and seeing as the potential of our young 'X-Factor' backs (O'Connor, Cooper and Beale) is also obvious he revolved the 'game plan', or lack thereof, around it. A lazy effort from Deans.

 

[FANATIC]

maybe its a brumbies attitude thing
would explain their super 15 campaign!

No it is a 2000 onwards WALLABIES thing.
Back when the Wallabies played what was called by many.... Brumbies Rugby.
Back when we actually had a REAL chance of winning the RWC.
Deans did not like 'Brumbies' rugby, he would rather invent his own kind what ever the duck that is.

 

[FANATIC]

The evidence for Deans' coaching ability comes almost entirely from his stints at the Crusaders from 2000-2002 and 2004-2007. The Crusaders team that he inherited in 2000 had already won the Super 12 in 1998 and 1999 under Wayne Smith (who took them from last in 1996). To me this proves that he is a coach who can take a winning team and keep it going, but is not evidence that he is able to rebuild a team from the ground up. Incidentally there were similar claims made about John Hart during his career - he did very well with teams that were basically established (Auckland 1984-87 and NZ 1996-97) but was unable to rebuild the team when he lost the core of the members in 1998.

Maybe Deans is a great coach but not the guy you really needed.

Thank you
This is what I have been saying for FOUR LONG YEARS now.

Maybe Deans is a great coach, for a NZ ABs team, not ours.

 

[disco]

Aussies coaches for Australia I say we've got plenty of good ones so why go else where.

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

living in the glory days, FANATIC
wallabies and the brumbies have moved on from the campaigns of 99 etc.
brumbies rugby as you call it hasn't been played by either the brumbies or the wallabies in ages. well before deans' appointment, so i would hardly say the decline of said rugby is deans' fault.

you need certain players to play that brand of rugby. you need larkhams and mortlocks. the only player similar to mortlock of 99 in aus rugby is mortlock now. and for all quade's magic he is no larkham.....barnes has a shot at playing that style, but then he'd lack stirlo.

on a side note, I think stirling would have done a better job at this world cup backing up 13 than Faainga.

 

[RugbyReg]

So do we all think that Deans never had a proper "game plan" while coaching the Crusaders as well or just while he has been coaching the Wallabies?

"when we have the ball, give it to Dan Carter. When we don't have the ball, Richie you go get it for us"

 

[pete88]

"when we have the ball, give it to Dan Carter. When we don't have the ball, Richie you go get it for us"

Made me laugh

 

[Bullrush]

Thank you
This is what I have been saying for FOUR LONG YEARS now.

Maybe Deans is a great coach, for a NZ ABs team, not ours.

Errrrrr.....no thanks. We had our turn with him at the All Blacks hence why so many of us were happy to see GH re-appointed.

on a side note, I think stirling would have done a better job at this world cup backing up 13 than Faainga.

I said this a few weeks back. I reckon having Morlock, G Smith and the squad would have been a big boost....and Sharpey on the field.

 

[Hawko]

I think Nucifora will get it. McKenzie's committed until 2013, Nucifora isn't. He's been in the set-up for a while, which works in his favour. As long as we pick a scrum coach, hire a full time kicking coach and set out a proper game plan we'll be fine.

Except that Nucifora's coaching record is terrible. His current coaching role has been the junior teams. This year on paper we had a pack that could match or better the baby Blacks. But when it got to the cup they were awful. Unco-ordinated, disinterested and unskilled. Absolutely smashed by NZ, it was ugly to watch. Before that he coached the Blues for three years and they never looked a chance for anything but the wooden spoon. Immediate improvement when Pat Lam replaced him. Before that he was the nominal coach of the Brumbies but the players thought so highly of him they revolted and ran the show themselves. If we pick Nucifora to replace Deans we will look back at the Deans era as a success story.

So, no. When Deans goes in 2013 I want Link, Axel, McKay and Blake. Proven performers, not pretenders.

 

[fatprop]

"when we have the ball, give it to Dan Carter. When we don't have the ball, Richie you go get it for us"

So the sames as the Brumbies\Wallabies "when we have the ball, give it to Larkham. When we don't have the ball, Smith you go get it for us"

 

[Sir Arthur Higgins]

Despite the fact that I do like deans. i really do question his undying faith in the youngins.

Mortlock could've provided a steady hand and been used as a mentor..play him against russia and the usa and have him help out the younger guys in the big games.

His dislike for sharpe is something i will never understand, particularily because i didn't rate vickerman more or less all tourney. perhaps he has mongrel, but he runs his mouth too much and gives away stupid penalties.

the alienation of giteau looks particularily bad when all deans' faith was put in cooper, who had a shocking tournament and deans' refusal to put barnes in at 10, let alone 12.

youd have a hard time convincing me giteau wouldn't have been a better 10 this tournament.

 

[slydare]

Gotta say that the Brumbies not wanting to train under Robbie gave me a little chuckle.

Reminds me of this "JM: Here it is Robbie. Just as I f$&#ing suspected! It’s a bloody text from Hoiles saying that he’s spoken to George and Squeak and they all agree that rucking and mauling drills would eat into their touch games."

Fact is that we persisted with "Brumbies' Rugby" for far too long as it was. As for the Brumbies of 2011, I think we should be trying to isolate the rest of Australian rugby from what has been going on in Canberra lately. Hopefully Jake White can restore things there.

 

[Gnostic]

Except that Nucifora's coaching record is terrible. His current coaching role has been the junior teams. This year on paper we had a pack that could match or better the baby Blacks. But when it got to the cup they were awful. Unco-ordinated, disinterested and unskilled. Absolutely smashed by NZ, it was ugly to watch. Before that he coached the Blues for three years and they never looked a chance for anything but the wooden spoon. Immediate improvement when Pat Lam replaced him. Before that he was the nominal coach of the Brumbies but the players thought so highly of him they revolted and ran the show themselves. If we pick Nucifora to replace Deans we will look back at the Deans era as a success story.

So, no. When Deans goes in 2013 I want Link, Axel, McKay and Blake. Proven performers, not pretenders.

Interesting to note that there is only AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) left of the Brumbies players that were in the Ponies team when Nucifora was the coach (was Alexander a starting player there then?) Since then Chisholm fell out of favour (deservingly so IMO) as did Giteau (also deservingly IMO). It is interesting because before his "official" Wallabies role both of these players held their spots like limpets on a rock regardless of performance. Along comes Nucifora and both are gone in less than a year. Yes I know Chis was broken before the end of the Super season, but does anybody really think that he would have been selected? It appears to me that any who were involved in that "player power" episode has been moved on, including one G. Smith or not considered Mortlock.

A few other points to note from other posts

1) There has been an ongoing lie perpetuated to justify Deans continuing failure, that of the youngest test side at the RWC. The Wallabies are not the youngest side, Wales are. In contrast Wales have actually played very well.

2) I am left astounded that anybody is surprised that players who had bee out of form all year (and sometimes longer) failed to perform. Many questions were raised about selection when the squad was announced, and not just the lack of a 7 (which IMO is indicative of how limited Deans vision is), but in the playing of players out of position. For many years a basic premise of selection is that a player should be the best available in his position, unless a player compliments others so that they combine together in a stronger unit than the individuals. Just looking at the pack there are at least 4 possibly 5 players out of position or clearly not the best in that position in Oz this year. Is it any wonder that in 4 tests this year they have failed to show up at all. IMO no it isn't, what is actually surprising is that they managed to get it together for the couple of games they did.

3) It isn't just Brumbies players that do not particularly rate Deans as coach. Suffice to say he is not that highly regarded by more than a few.

 

[louie]

Don't think Alexander was at the brumbies then.

Gnostic who did you think was out of form all year? AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) springs to mind.

Deans failure isn't in losing to the All Blacks, It's in losing to Ireland.

Does anyone have any info on the type of physical prep work the Wallabies do? Why do they appear so unfit and weaker then the opp. Seems likes a big problem for Australian Rugby.

 

[Hawko]

Despite the fact that I do like deans. i really do question his undying faith in the youngins.

Mortlock could've provided a steady hand and been used as a mentor..play him against russia and the usa and have him help out the younger guys in the big games.

His dislike for sharpe is something i will never understand, particularily because i didn't rate vickerman more or less all tourney. perhaps he has mongrel, but he runs his mouth too much and gives away stupid penalties.

the alienation of giteau looks particularily bad when all deans' faith was put in cooper, who had a shocking tournament and deans' refusal to put barnes in at 10, let alone 12.

youd have a hard time convincing me giteau wouldn't have been a better 10 this tournament.

Barnes would have been a far better choice this tournament than either Gits or Cooper. Gits doesn't have the skills of a 10, but he is a great 12. Truly great. Cooper is like a Carlos Spencer clone. Can do things with a football and backline that no human being should be able to. But subject to brain explosions at the worst possible times. It was Spencer's pass to Mortlock in the 2003 semi-final that broke NZ hearts. Just like Spencer, Cooper won Super tournaments for his franchise. But at the highest test level he is just too flakey. Maybe if Link had been coach he could have exerted some control, it worked for the Reds, but its dubious.

The only time that Cooper is better than Barnes is when the pack in front of him is dominating. I cannot put my hand on my heart and say that our pack could have dominated any of the teams in the quarter finals. Barnes should have started at 10 in the semi. Given Kurtley's injury I probably would have played him at 15 rather than AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), who could have stayed at 13.

 

[Loki74]

Don't think Alexander was at the brumbies then.

Gnostic who did you think was out of form all year? AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) springs to mind.

Deans failure isn't in losing to the All Blacks, It's in losing to Ireland.

Does anyone have any info on the type of physical prep work the Wallabies do? Why do they appear so unfit and weaker then the opp. Seems likes a big problem for Australian Rugby.

They don't always appear unfit and weaker. They matched a very physical boks team for 80 minutes. When they turn up, they can match it with most sides. Just don't do it consistently. And we shouldn't underestimate how much that Boks game would have taken out of them. 150 tackles to about 50. Whereas the Blacks got through a relatively easier game against Argentina.

 

[louie]

Gits would have given Dean options. Something we lacked this tournament. Deans seems to be very good at isolating players and having them go backwards. Very good.

 

[Loki74]

Barnes would have been a far better choice this tournament than either Gits or Cooper. Gits doesn't have the skills of a 10, but he is a great 12. Truly great. Cooper is like a Carlos Spencer clone. Can do things with a football and backline that no human being should be able to. But subject to brain explosions at the worst possible times. It was Spencer's pass to Mortlock in the 2003 semi-final that broke NZ hearts. Just like Spencer, Cooper won Super tournaments for his franchise. But at the highest test level he is just too flakey. Maybe if Link had been coach he could have exerted some control, it worked for the Reds, but its dubious.

The only time that Cooper is better than Barnes is when the pack in front of him is dominating. I cannot put my hand on my heart and say that our pack could have dominated any of the teams in the quarter finals. Barnes should have started at 10 in the semi. Given Kurtley's injury I probably would have played him at 15 rather than AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), who could have stayed at 13.

In fairness, there was a big question mark over Barnes coming into this, with the issues he had with headaches. However, Deans has been (and still is) very slow to react now that Barnes appears (at least to me) to be back to close to his best. I don't think Barnes offers the same attacking game, either running or passing (Cooper's passing game when on song is pretty amazing. Can pass long range and hit the mark both sides. Some of his transfers to Beale are feats in themselves, when you consider it is sometimes 30 odd metres across field to Beale on the fly). But critically, he is a bit more mature and a cooler under pressure.

 

[Ash]

Regarding AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) at fullback, I didn't get that. I would've moved J'OC to fullback, and put AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) on the wing myself, particularly as J'OC's kicking is better, or maybe even punted on Barnes, although I reckon that is a big risk. Easy in hindsight, however, especially seeing as AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) had a bit of a shocker from fullback in terms of attack.

 

[Ash]

I don't think Barnes at 10 would suit a counter attacking game, unless Barnes reels in his first instinct to kick. Barnes will typically look to kick first, pass second, all counter attack ball. What I don't get is why Genia decided to start doing the same thing in the WC. Genia's loss of form was a big shame, but probably no surprise as he was pretty good for the Reds all year, and good in the Tri-Nations too.