tahs turnaround

[jay-c]

this is something id like discussed and the other threads dont quite hit the note
watching the code a few weeks back i noticed jamie pandaram (smh writer) suggest that the only way the tahs will bring back the fans is if they win the title. personally i believe his and the tah boards view of the fans being this fickle is incorrect. sure a title will bring fans but the issue i have had with the tahs the last few years was the boring style of play- the aimless kicking and the lack off passion the players showed> fans jus dont wanna watch it
i played in team sports my whole life, i understand you cant win everyone- but i dont expect them too> the last half of the season for the tahs - the two losses in south africa> id rather watch teams lose like this than some of the rubbish ive seen the last few years>>
the courage and passion the team played with in their last few games with all their injuries convinced me to buy another membership next year> this is what i wanna see from my team> not a team trying not to lose.

 

[fatprop]

my only concern is dumb rugby with aimless, incontestable kicking. But the Tahs finished the season having a go and were beaten by a better side on the day- I can live with that and even most of their losses in the season as they were competitive in all (except the Cheetahs - but they showed that they were the big improvers of the whole comp IMHO) and played some good rugby

 

[Lee Grant]

"Agree" doesn't quite do it fatprop. [Maybe the last part is contentious: the Cheetahs improved a lot.]

I would have taken me 10 paragraphs to write that.

 

[Tahfan]

The simple fact is Sydney crowds in general are a fickle bunch. If they Tahs are winning and playing good rugby then they will flock to the games. If EITHER of those components are missing then they wont gain traction. They dont need to win the comp to get ppl through the gates but they need to be a winning team who are at least in contention....

 

[chasmac]

My frustration with the Tah's is that they consistently play below their potential. There is stacks of evidence, lots of examples, multiple reasons for this. It is the single biggest thing that drives me nuts about them. Any proper gameplan is ok, just execute it with whatever it takes and I will be much happier. For the same reason I like watching the Rebels (early season), the Reds and the Force. Don't get me started on the Brumbies, I hope Jake White goes through them and cleans them up like he is expected to do. The wasted potential in Brumbyland is a tragedy.

 

[Groucho]

The simple fact is Sydney crowds in general are a fickle bunch. If they Tahs are winning and playing good rugby then they will flock to the games. If EITHER of those components are missing then they wont gain traction. They dont need to win the comp to get ppl through the gates but they need to be a winning team who are at least in contention....

Tahfan, I think if the Tahs were playing attractive rugby and competing then the fans would come, although obviously not in the same numbers as if they were winning as well. I would guess that half the missing fans come for the spectacle, and half for the winning. Winning pretty would draw new fans through the gates. This isn't a 'Sydney phenomenon', as much as fans of other provinces wish it to be. The Reds have been playing attractive rugby for several years. But attendances spiked this year. What is different about this year? They are winning, is what is different.

 

[RedsHappy]

Tahfan, I think if the Tahs were playing attractive rugby and competing then the fans would come, although obviously not in the same numbers as if they were winning as well. I would guess that half the missing fans come for the spectacle, and half for the winning. Winning pretty would draw new fans through the gates. This isn't a 'Sydney phenomenon', as much as fans of other provinces wish it to be. The Reds have been playing attractive rugby for several years. But attendances spiked this year. What is different about this year? They are winning, is what is different.

Good post Groucho. That whole 'Sydney phenomenon' argument that, in fairness, is often as much propagated (as some kind of defence) by Sydney Tahs observers as by anyone else, is largely bunkum IMO (btw, I have lived on and off in Sydney for over 25 years). The characteristics you note are more or less true re almost any mainline sport, anywhere in Australia. Every Australian rugby franchise that has not broken through to a very strong winning pattern has, in recent years, witnessed gradual crowd declines, some quite severe (see kiap's and Moses' crowd stats as needed).

 

[RedsHappy]

my only concern is dumb rugby with aimless, incontestable kicking. But the Tahs finished the season having a go and were beaten by a better side on the day- I can live with that and even most of their losses in the season as they were competitive in all (except the Cheetahs - but they showed that they were the big improvers of the whole comp IMHO) and played some good rugby

Gee, fp, that from you (and endorsed by LG, which surprised me) strikes me as a very low level of expectation of Australia's premier state rugby team. Of course, like opinions, we're all entitled to our expectations, but I would have thought that a man who posts here many times each day would expect a lot more of his Tahs - like a Finals win, finishing in the top 2, etc.

Perhaps that's what's happened to much of Australian rugby: complete execution excellence and deep skills on show, major victories, getting to the very top, high quality management of the franchises, etc, it's just not expected anymore. I believe it was once.

 

[fatprop]

It would be my preference, but with their injuries I was amazed they made the finals.

 

[GC]

Don't mean it to be a slight but I just can't read unbroken paragraphs without capitalization and grammar like the original post.

 

[DPK]

Come on RH, surely it's acceptable that we have realistic expectations of our teams?

 

[RedsHappy]

Come on RH, surely it's acceptable that we have realistic expectations of our teams?

Oh well, I guess if you come to the view as a Tahs' supporter that 'oh heck, as we end 2011's season, every important outcome that we did or did not achieve is principally explained by these multiple injured players' and that is enough for your rugby heart, then, OK, that is 'realistic expectation' of sorts. But if you take say a Hawko, Gnostic, Scarfman (amongst others) perspectives, they seem to be examining deeper attributes of the Tahs' 2011 play (and the standards and culture underpinning it) that in their opinions are subject to what should be much higher expectations of quality (in management, players, core skills etc) to be delivered by a team/business with the Tahs' resources and history.

The point being: expectations are are function of what you choose to observe as important, and what you assume should be delivered by the standards you set, or require demonstrable improvement upon. There are clearly very different perspectives on these boards as to what expectations of different teams, and the management of those teams, should be.

(For what it's worth, all my experience in business has been that if you set high standards and express demanding expectations (provided they are within the realms of achieve-ability), you will ultimately gain a far better final outcome than if you are willing to 'forgive' mediocrity and find lots of explanations for it that let's those responsible off the hook.)

 

[DPK]

RH, what did you expect the Tahs to achieve this year?

 

[Lee Grant]

Last year the Tahs won quite a few games but yours truly was still whingeing. Folks were asking me would I rather the Tahs won ugly or lost playing attractive rugby.

I said it was the wrong question. The right question was: "If they won a game playing ugly, could they not also have won it having a go?" I also said, probably in the same post, that I enjoyed the Reds method of play a lot more than how the Tahs played, because they had a go and trusted their skill. Nothing has changed there for 2011 either.

As Gnostic keeps saying: the skills of some of the Tahs backs in some games this year were poor. As I said elsewhere: they seemed not to have practised passing. In this context it is probably why they didn't have a go on those occasions when having a go was likely to succeed.

But it is an old song I sing.

 

[cyclopath]

RH - I thought the Tahs should realistically make the finals, maybe a couple of places higher, so am marginally disappointed. I never thought they were top 2-3 at the beginning or middle of the season. Are my expectations less valid because I feel the bar might be set lower? Why are the analyses, and subsequent expectations of others more valid?

 

[RedsHappy]

RH, what did you expect the Tahs to achieve this year?

Given (a) the excellent overall player resources the Tahs possessed as of February 2011 and (b) the way they came out of the gates in the early S15 rounds (which I thought was formidable and quite outstanding) and (c) my belief that, surely, all of the Tahs and their managers would be desperate for a Finals win, then, given all this, I expected that they were a good chance to do it at last. So, I expected them to be a No 1 or 2 this year. I still find it inexplicable as to why after Round 2, a decline in application and execution skill seemed to commence, the 2011 Tahs story is by no means all about injuries.

(And, as an aside, I for one am not entirely convinced the incredibly high injury count has not got something to do with either or both of the Tahs S&C regime and/or the 'play the best XV starts every single week' coaching modality that Hawko has articulated. I didn't say everything to do with these factors, that would be silly, but potentially something, or some part of it all, to do with them.)

 

[waratahjesus]

Just throwing it out there re the "start best 15 every week" how many times did we have our best 15 on the park?

Further more, if the coaching staff train week in week out with a group of players and rate them in a position, being that the tahs execution of skills is in question for there starting team, how would giving game time to players judged less skillful improve this in the here and now?

The tahs had two problems that let the season slip, lack of combination in the backs (injury is a contributing factor to that) and kicking.

 

[Hawko]

Don't mean it to be a slight but I just can't read unbroken paragraphs without capitalization and grammar like the original post.

Welcome to the brave new world of twitter and facebook.

 

[DPK]

(a) the excellent overall player resources the Tahs possessed as of February 2011

Who are the measuring stick you're comparing the Tahs roster too? The Reds? The Crusaders? The Lions?

Compared to the Lions, excellent. Compared to the Reds, more solid in some positions but far less so in others. Not as strong as the Crusaders bar a few players.

(b) the way they came out of the gates in the early S15 rounds

I agree with this, and this is where much of the trouble of the season started. We beat a hapless Rebels side and cruised past the Reds (mostly thanks to our strengths matching their weaknesses), and these set most people's expectations for the rest of the year. But both of these victories, in hindsight of course, seem rather hollow; the Rebels in particular. Then, when the Tahs came up against a really strong side and were badly beaten, some fans took stock and came back to Earth, but the majority of fans continued to expect to see the Tahs crush their foes as in week 1 and 2.

 

[RedsHappy]

Last year the Tahs won quite a few games but yours truly was still whingeing. Folks were asking me would I rather the Tahs won ugly or lost playing attractive rugby....I said it was the wrong question. The right question was: "If they won a game playing ugly, could they not also have won it having a go?" I also said, probably in the same post, that I enjoyed the Reds method of play a lot more than how the Tahs played, because they had a go and trusted their skill. Nothing has changed there for 2011 either....As Gnostic keeps saying: the skills of some of the Tahs backs in some games this year were poor. As I said elsewhere: they seemed not to have practised passing. In this context it is probably why they didn't have a go on those occasions when having a go was likely to succeed.

But it is an old song I sing.

It may be old LG, but if one examines the substance of what is being sung about, it is fundamental. '....they seemed not to have practiced passing...' Your points above are very similar to those B Dwyer has been making in his observations of the Tahs in 2011.