Not defeatist at all. Redshappy's post yesterday sum up what I feel. In short we have some extremely talented players and really the makings of a side that could be as great as either the 1990-1994 or 1998-2002 sides. I do not believe that any of the players selected are bad players. I strongly believe that the reign of Deans has been a litany of mismanagement and wasted opportunities, much as the Tahs were up to this year. I will look forward to each game with the knowledge that the players really want to win and will give their all to do so and they will in so many cases be able to pull a game out of the fire through sheer guts and will. What I do doubt is the ability of Robbie Deans to give the side the tools to truly beat a good side through exciting adventurous play.
I am a rugby fanatic, that means I can see the beauty in a grinding game, a conservative field position game, the Boks up and under game of a few years ago as much as the ensemble play of the Randwick and Tahs sides of the late 80's early 90's. The key is the formation of the plan, selection of the players to play it by selecting for the correct skill sets in the proper positions and finally the execution by the players. What I cannot stand and despise is the waste and mismanagement of so much talent by playing half formed game plans and selecting players out of their positions for plans that are far removed from their skill set, before we even get to the players trying to execute a pile of S&^%.
Perhaps Deans has learnt a bit from the RWC where he selected Cooper to play a game he was totally unsuited for. If he has and that is the reason for his omission hooray!!!!, I could support such reasoning totally. It is however a lesson that a coach of his "standing" shouldn't have had to learn in a RWC semi final, and it seems to me that Deans has been learning these sort of lessons the hard way since arriving to coach a test side, with Giteau being the first.
Finally what I truly despise is a manager of any stripe abrogating his responsibilities and blaming underlings for plans that go awry and running their people into the ground while he continues on his merry way while he learns his lessons and never says well I learn something there, it is instead the fault of Giteau or Cooper or injuries (when he selected the players while injured in the first place).
I am not defeatist at all, I will not however sugar coat the truth as I see it.