Wallabies 2023

[rodha]

The way it turned out, Dave Rennie had, and still has, huge potential - but he wasn't ready for the Wallabies.

Not ready? Bhahaha...

Rennie's CV when he was appointed in 2019:

Wellington 1999-2000 (champions 2000), Hurricanes assistant 2001-2002 , Manawatu 2005-2011 (got the poorest union promoted into 1st division), NZ U20's 2008-2010 (three consecutive titles), Chiefs 2012-2017 (two consecutive titles), Glasgow 2017-2019 (2018 URC final).

That's 20 years of coaching professionally (Deans had 12 years) and Rennie was 56 when he took over the Wallabies, 1 NPC title, 2 Super Rugby titles, 3 national U20 titles, so you'd think if he wasn't ready then - when would he ever be?

 

[KOB1987]

Plenty of us know what it is like to be a fan following a 2/5 result with a dismissive attitude clearly taken to the Azuri.

There is not just one option in rotation policy, the one they chose failed.

this 100%.

They chose the option of selecting the 2nd 23. I understand the need to both rest some players and also give some others a run, but the correct approach (IMO) would have been to select the 2nd starting XV all pencilled in to play 70 minutes and had 8 of the 1st XV on the bench. It was a test match, not a midweeker.

 

[rodha]

They chose the option of selecting the 2nd 23. I understand the need to both rest some players and also give some others a run, but the correct approach (IMO) would have been to select the 2nd starting XV all pencilled in to play 70 minutes and had 8 of the 1st XV on the bench.

Rennie was prioritizing the Ireland match, a rationale decision to rest the 1st XV, and it very almost payed dividends - they were simply rolling towards the try-line unimpeded from 5 metres out... the ref called a penalty against them for something that 95% of the time the attacking team gets away with. Australia deserved to win that match & Rennie was vindicated for prioritizing that game above Italy.

 

[KOB1987]

Rennie was prioritizing the Ireland match, a rationale decision to rest the 1st XV, and it very almost payed dividends - they were simply rolling towards the try-line unimpeded from 5 metres out... the ref called a penalty against them for something that 95% of the time the attacking team gets away with. Australia deserved to win that match & Rennie was vindicated for prioritizing that game above Italy.

I don't dispute the dubiousness of that decision but the records will still say we lost a test match to Italy. And to Ireland, and France for that matter.

 

[dru]

Not ready? Bhahaha...

Rennie's CV when he was appointed in 2019:

Wellington 1999-2000 (champions 2000), Hurricanes assistant 2001-2002 , Manawatu 2005-2011 (got the poorest union promoted into 1st division), NZ U20's 2008-2010 (three consecutive titles), Chiefs 2012-2017 (two consecutive titles), Glasgow 2017-2019 (2018 URC final).

That's 20 years of coaching professionally (Deans had 12 years) and Rennie was 56 when he took over the Wallabies, 1 NPC title, 2 Super Rugby titles, 3 national U20 titles, so you'd think if he wasn't ready then - when would he ever be?

I said he wasn't ready. Made no comment about the quality of his background and preparation.

 

[Doritos Day]

Vindicated by a loss lmfao

 

[Froggy]

Rodha, as I've said I would have kept Rennie on until after the WC but, despite your passionate and unwavering support of him, a professional coach's job is to win rugby matches, and at the very least improve the performance of the team. Just like a corporate CEO, a salesman or most other professions, fair or not, you are judged by results. And by that measure, he failed to perform.
This is the real world of professional sport, this is not U13's 'gee but he tries hard every week and he's a great kid!'
I know you won't accept this argument, you are not one for wavering, but it's the real world!

 

[wamberal]

. Just like a corporate CEO, a salesman or most other professions, fair or not, you are judged by results. And by that measure, he failed to perform.

The more successful organisations that I have had something to do with did not just "judge by results". Corporate success or failure is a bit more nuanced than that, and IMHO evaluating the performance of a national sporting coach is a lot more complex than "how many games did the team win"?

Rennie had charge of the helm during some very rough weather, our Wallaby player base was impacted adversely when the pandemic struck. The injury toll was also pretty diabolical (bearing in mind that maybe coaching decisions had something to do with that).

Finally, I make the observation that the only reason he was kicked out was because RA decided to put all its eggs into the Eddie Eyebrows basket.

 

[Froggy]

Sorry Wamberal, while there is a bit of nuance, it is all about results, even if it shouldn't be. NRL, soccer, rugby, American football, you name it, coaches are routinely sacked when the results don't go there way.
How many CEO's have you seen with a run of poor results, have the full support of the board, and then resign to 'spend more time with their family'?

 

[Lightblue]

The more successful organisations that I have had something to do with did not just "judge by results". Corporate success or failure is a bit more nuanced than that, and IMHO evaluating the performance of a national sporting coach is a lot more complex than "how many games did the team win"?

Rennie had charge of the helm during some very rough weather, our Wallaby player base was impacted adversely when the pandemic struck. The injury toll was also pretty diabolical (bearing in mind that maybe coaching decisions had something to do with that).

Finally, I make the observation that the only reason he was kicked out was because Rugby Australia decided to put all its eggs into the Eddie Eyebrows basket.

I'm with you Wamberal. Rennie was shafted big time. The players thought he was great and as you say, he presided over the team during extremely unusual circumstances. Eddie will benefit initially from Rennie's work but 5 years? Everyone will be over him by then. So should that mean if he has to be paid out of his contract early, it comes out of McLennan's package ?! Obviously not.....should though...

 

[wamberal]

Sorry Wamberal, while there is a bit of nuance, it is all about results, even if it shouldn't be. NRL, soccer, rugby, American football, you name it, coaches are routinely sacked when the results don't go there way.
How many CEO's have you seen with a run of poor results, have the full support of the board, and then resign to 'spend more time with their family'?

I don't think in simplistic factors when it comes to performance measurement. We will never know how well Rennie' Wallabies would have performed, of course. I happen to think that he was unlucky to be kicked out at this juncture, and I wonder how long Eddie will last in the job.

Any guesses?

 

[Lightblue]

Rodha, as I've said I would have kept Rennie on until after the WC but, despite your passionate and unwavering support of him, a professional coach's job is to win rugby matches, and at the very least improve the performance of the team. Just like a corporate CEO, a salesman or most other professions, fair or not, you are judged by results. And by that measure, he failed to perform.
This is the real world of professional sport, this is not U13's 'gee but he tries hard every week and he's a great kid!'
I know you won't accept this argument, you are not one for wavering, but it's the real world!

Froggy...if it is all about results, maybe there should be more scrutiny over the board. Bill Pulver presided over Rugby Australia and ran it into the ground. Then had the hide to take a substantial bonus when leaving, that Rugby Australia could definitely NOT afford.! The arrogance of that knob is breathtaking. Then we blame it all on the 'woman'...poor old Raelene. Sacked by all the ex Wallabies because she had the hide to look at alternatives to the evil Fox broadcasting empire ....that ironically some ex Wallaby captains had jobs with! Now we have McLennan signing Jones to a 5 year package....let's see how that pans out? Mmmmmm.

 

[Lightblue]

I don't think in simplistic factors when it comes to performance measurement. We will never know how well Rennie' Wallabies would have performed, of course. I happen to think that he was unlucky to be kicked out at this juncture, and I wonder how long Eddie will last in the job.

Any guesses?

My guess is it definitely won't be 5 years.

 

[Derpus]

Imagine losing to Italy and not expecting to be sacked within minutes of the final whistle

Can use all the corporate bullshit you want to justify it. Was fucken shameful.

 

[Doritos Day]

Rennie had charge of the helm during some very rough weather, our Wallaby player base was impacted adversely when the pandemic struck. The injury toll was also pretty diabolical (bearing in mind that maybe coaching decisions had something to do with that).

Because of Super AU and not playing international opposition (which Eddie Jones has commented on a bit), or player drain?

If anything COVID 'helped' retain more players in Australia in 2020-21 than usual, and it's only last year and post WC that regularly scheduled programming has resumed with the likes of LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto), Simone, Banks etc. heading overseas and Holloway, Hanigan types soon to follow.

Rennie also benefitted from an expanded Giteau Law.

 

[Doritos Day]

Imagine losing to Italy and not expecting to be sacked within minutes of the final whistle

Can use all the corporate bullshit you want to justify it. Was fucken shameful.

There's discourse from many countries at the moment surrounding rebuilding periods and 'free hits' at test level (i.e. excuse making) which I don't think happened near as much a decade ago

You play a dozen games a year and the objective is to win all of them, always has been. Yes there is some provisioning for the future (WC's) but it's not the level to be playing with fire. Australia compromised themselves last year with the Autumn scheduling and in that context I don't think the Italy result by itself was sack worthy but there was no payoff from how they approached it, thus Rennie paid the price.

It might be revisionist but I maintain losing the England series was the biggest disaster. Results at home are always more important, and look at what they've dished up since.

Getting 'close enough' at the test level means nothing. Especially in a market like Australia where the Wallabies don't have the luxury of losing whilst hoping that all the pieces fall into place for a two month period every four years.

 

[Lightblue]

Imagine losing to Italy and not expecting to be sacked within minutes of the final whistle

Can use all the corporate bullshit you want to justify it. Was fucken shameful.

Well Derps. I agree in part. That match was always going to be the one where they rested players and blooded others. Did they take them too lightly? Yes. Right from the dropped kick off they looked terrible and Italy more determined. I know you aren't a Donaldson fan but I don't think even you would have chosen to put the kid on with 4 minutes to go ...on debut and they are behind. He probably should have kicked the goal, yes. However, a better coach, if deciding to blood him, would have given him at least 20 minutes...and yes.....losing to Italy wasn't a coaching winner. In saying that, the result against France in the 6 nations last weekend shows they are definitely not to be taken lightly. Thank you Rennie, thank you Derps, thank you ballboys.

 

[qwerty51]

In the scheme of things I doubt Italy got him sacked. It was the 2 losses to England at home, the Bledisloe performances and not winning either France or Ireland.

But mainly England I’d say. We won the first test down a man for the majority of the game, and then we go on to lose in Brisbane and Sydney. We looked awful, couldn’t score and poorly coached.

The record Arg loss away could easily be excused by the injuries and the big Springbok loss at home softened by the week before. RA were probably understanding about the Italy selection given it was their manufacturing in the first place.

 

[TSR]

I assumed it is just a culmination of all of the above, combined with the fact that Rennie wasn’t McLennan’s man and Eddie very much was. McLennan met with Eddie while he was here so, at that point, he obviously already had interest in bringing Eddie back.

When England sacked Jones, and with other offers on the table, McLennan’s hand was forced to move or miss out - possibly for the term of McLennan’s tenure. It would have been pretty hard for McLennan to justify axing Rennie if he’d been running at a 50% win rate or better and/or had just won 4/5 on the EOYT. But the culmination of the above losses left Rennie vulnerable. It became easy for McLennan and it seems it was a path he wanted to go down so he pulled the levers.

 

[Froggy]

Light Blue, I actually agree with everything you said, regarding Pulver, Raelene and Jones, it doesn't change my suggestion that a professional coach lives or dies on results.
If you employ a salesman, his job is to sell whatever you are dealing with. Providing you give him good training, and work with him to try to turn things around if he/she is struggling, at the end of the day if they aren't selling anything they are just taking up a desk and a salary. Results, at the end of the day, matter.