Ewen McKenzie: Wallaby Coach

[Ignoto]

I like to watch - Have you listened to Gagger and Timmsy interview Link? He specifically covers all of those points, why things aren't working and what they're trying to do.

 

[I like to watch]

No I haven't.
What did he say about what appears to be manic applications of a game plan,that are then totally changed at half time?
My point is really, that Link needs to hasten slowly.just change a few little things,improve on them and then to the next.
Improvement should be incremental so that is more likely to be sustainable.

 

[Muglair]

Seriously. There's a game plan?

 

[Cardiffblue]

What does the result of the SA game do for Wallabies IRB ranking? There was a lot of talk before the match how if they won they would go second. Tried to do the calculation now they lost by more than 15 and it seems they just plummeted or have I miscalculated?

 

[KevinO]

What does the result of the SA game do for Wallabies IRB ranking? There was a lot of talk before the match how if they won they would go second. Tried to do the calculation now they lost by more than 15 and it seems they just plummeted or have I miscalculated?

I think they will drop just over full point which brings them very close to France and Wales, not that the rankings mean much until the end of 2016 anyway.

EOYT could see them in serious trouble if they drop a few games.

 

[Muglair]

I do not think the loss makes a lot of difference to the relative ranking and we are still 4. Well not me, I suspect complex mathematics at work:

http://www.lassen.co.nz/pagmisc.php#hrh

Really not sure about this though. I thought I had it nailed some years ago and it was easier than this.

Maybe we should call the lineouts using 3 decimal places. Maybe TPN already does?

 

[RoffsChoice]

Did the maths, if we only beat Italy on the EOYT we drop to 9th.

 

[RedsHappy]

I like to watch - Have you listened to Gagger and Timmsy interview Link? He specifically covers all of those points, why things aren't working and what they're trying to do.

For me, I thought Link sounded all of anxious, addled, unclear and had his core thinking in a mess on that podcast. I said to parties after that interview that Link sounded not on top of his job, frankly.

Just one example: his striking proposition that the Wallabies were/would be using a double playmaker axis of a 10-12 combo as some kind of innovative attacking tactic - yet have we seen any credible evidence of that in effective execution terms?

Then he's also these days listing just as many weak excuses for his team's awfulness as Deans did, and adding some. Example: that the new scrum laws are confusing and messing up all the leading teams' scrums etc - the evidence gives no support to this whilst meanwhile his scrum/set-piece coach is manifestly mishandling his responsibilities, those that he's allegedly been applying since early 2012 no less. Link - fatefully - decided to keep this second-rate specialist coach on and I said at the outset that, plus ditto with Scrivener on defence, was a serious error in Link's judgement and one that would hold many negative consequences.

Worse is something Link is now indulging in and that I bitterly disliked re Deans: public blaming or de facto patronising of Wallaby players after losses, casting all responsibility onto 'their issues' and taking no direct responsibility as leader of the Wallaby team design and fundamental skill base (and its improvement) in play. This is a sure sign of a leader handling pressure badly and weakly and will invariably corrode team morale as well. It can also be a sign of a loss of knowledge or confidence as to what to do to genuinely improve his charges.

I always said I'd not judge Link until well into the EOYTs. He needed at least until then to make core improvements to the sad state of a team and team culture he inherited after 6 full years of Deans' failed craftwork. However, I am now very concerned well before then given Link's explicit and implicit conduct to date and the zero improvement in any aspect of Wallaby play in his five Tests.

Perhaps Link's high water mark was July 2011, and the Reds gradual, relative competitive decline since then was no coincidence. I sincerely hope that mounting fear proves wrong by December 2013.

 

[Braveheart81]

Link - fatefully - decided to keep this second-rate specialist coach on and I said at the outset that, plus ditto with Scrivener on defence, was a serious error in Link's judgement and one that would hold many negative consequences.

I think this is a difficult one at this point.

When Link was appointed there wasn't really much time to look at other appointments. The Rugby Championship was only a few weeks away and the Reds were still alive in Super Rugby.

Whether the ARU gave him that option at that time is also unknown. Those coaches would have been contracted until the end of the year and it is unknown whether the ARU would have allowed the appointment of new coaches knowing that they've had to continue paying the old ones.

Given the lack of time I think sacking the coaches and appointing new ones would have also been a bad move. In that sort of time frame you'd have seen him appoint the coaching staff he already knows because that is the only real option you have in that situation. Link wouldn't have known if the coaches already at the Wallabies were any good or not so making a decision to get rid of them without working with them would have been entirely arbitrary.

There needs to be a thorough review of all the Wallabies assistant coaches (including the ones they don't have!) at the end of the year so we can start next test season with a settled coaching team. There just isn't time to do any of this prior to the EOYT.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Then he's also these days listing just as many weak excuses for his team's awfulness as Deans did, and adding some. Example: that the new scrum laws are confusing and messing up all the leading teams' scrums etc - the evidence gives no support to this whilst meanwhile his scrum/set-piece coach is manifestly mishandling his responsibilities, those that he's allegedly been applying since early 2012 no less. Link - fatefully - decided to keep this second-rate specialist coach on and I said at the outset that, plus ditto with Scrivener on defence, was a serious error in Link's judgement and one that would hold many negative consequences.

Why do you think this?
I have a hunch that you're right but I dont know why I think that and I'd be interested to know if you'd analysed it so i could base my hunch on something rational.

 

[Muglair]

I am also in the hunch territory, just down in the uneducated sector.

As far as the coaches go my recollection is that one criticism of Deans was that he preferred to be a one man band and preferred coaches less likely to question his course. As a response after 2011 RWC he was more or less directed to take the contracted coaching staff. Can anyone confirm? This obviously is not the ideal way forward and Link is one further circle away inheriting the structure.

Defence seems to have been slipping over time and is obviously currently achieving the worst results for some time, almost 3 tries per game this year.

Scrums are not historically a strong point of our game, I often feel we are reactive in this area. Baxter and Dunning were I think unfairly crucified for being at the front of a scrum that seemed to disintegrate at times. Foley and co worked hard to bring it back to scratch but once we did we seemed to stop focussing on it and it drifted away again. We are now in the same cycle with a period of improvement giving away to a scrum that sometimes just falls apart under the pressure.

During the Foley period the amount of focus placed on the 8 man unit to perform in the scrum was the stuff of whole newspaper articles (a wonderful time of intellectual nourishment) and that focus appears to be no longer there. A good question would be does the scrum coach get consulted on selecting the best scrummaging forwards or is he asked to do his best with the running, passing, leaping cattle he is given?

 

[Froggy]

When Cheika took over coaching the Tahs, we didn't see results straight away, but we saw changes, glimpses of things we hadn't seen before, just enough to have you come away thinking "heck of a long way to go, but I like what I'm seeing."

I was all in favour of Link getting the job, and still think it was the right call, but I don't know if it's just me but I'm not seeing anything at all to suggest a turnaround is on the way. Not calling for his head, but would just like to see something to indicate we're on the right track.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Give the bloke until the end of the year.

He has been saddled with assistants and cattle on big top up contracts that he had no say in. He needs a little time to sort out wheat from chaff, and let some expensive contracts run their course (the ARU coffers are not all that healthy according to the Pulveriser's discussions with SRU). Then there is the Team Rehab issues.

If he doesn't show some signs of improvement in terms of selecting some gooder assistants, and get the players executing his betterer game plan, for 2014, then I say unleash the hounds.

Would that bloke helping the Argies be available to assist on short term consultancy role?

 

[Muglair]

Absolutely agree Froggy, I tried to post something earlier but it got mucked up I think (or deleted?).

I remember the first game; clearly under instructions not to kick the backs looked lost, unable to decide who to pass to or which lines to run. From there the improvements were obvious each game.

For a whole lot of reasons Deans time was up and McKenzie the only coach in waiting. My fear is that RedsHappy is on the mark and that Cooper and McKenzie have had their golden year and they cannot reverse the slide we appear to be on. To be fair, what a golden year it was.

I think the focus on the Brumbies and Reds because they finished high on the table could be misplaced. Are they being compared to early season Tahs or late season Tahs.

As an aside I believe that total commitment to the plan is vital. Waratahs won a couple of close games mid season when they kept pushing for a winning try. They lost a couple at the end when they tried to win with penalty goals (Dennis was certainly off the field in one instance against the Crusaders).

I can see a change in coach for EOYT 2014.

 

[No4918]

Would that bloke helping the Argies be available to assist on short term consultancy role?

Pigs will fly before that happens.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I can see a change in coach for EOYT 2014.

Really?
Big call.
I am furiously and stridently giving him the benefit of the doubt: I fear we're going backwards at the moment.

 

[Richo]

There is some serious panic merchanting on this thread.

Link is the coach until the RWC in 2015 at the very earliest. He's only had the team for a little while, and not much of that has allowed much time for planning. The results are torrid, but I think a bit of patience is required.

 

[Rob42]

When Cheika took over coaching the Tahs, we didn't see results straight away, but we saw changes, glimpses of things we hadn't seen before, just enough to have you come away thinking "heck of a long way to go, but I like what I'm seeing."

I was all in favour of Link getting the job, and still think it was the right call, but I don't know if it's just me but I'm not seeing anything at all to suggest a turnaround is on the way. Not calling for his head, but would just like to see something to indicate we're on the right track.

Agree Froggy. I keep thinking of that Tahs game against the Brumbies in about Rd 4 this year. After that game, I thought Cheika was doing great things for the culture of the team, but would come up short on the field. The Tahs looked disorganised, flat and low on confidence. And that was after he'd had them for a full pre-season. Give Link some time, painful as it is to say now.

 

[cyclopath]

There is some serious panic merchanting on this thread.

Link is the coach until the RWC in 2015 at the very earliest. He's only had the team for a little while, and not much of that has allowed much time for planning. The results are torrid, but I think a bit of patience is required.

I agree we have to give him some time, and be patient, but I do not agree that hard questions should not be asked.
I really want to see some true progress in core forward play - physicality at breakdowns, scrums and mauling skills, then lineouts. So far, we seem to be fudging around these areas with no demonstrable improvement.
They can start on the backs too, but seriously, get the pigs right, and our backs might look less ordinary.
The idea of assistant coaching change appeals, but do we really know who is truly available currently?

 

[Train Without a Station]

There is some serious panic merchanting on this thread.

Link is the coach until the RWC in 2015 at the very earliest. He's only had the team for a little while, and not much of that has allowed much time for planning. The results are torrid, but I think a bit of patience is required.

Well said, the true time for determining if we have progressed/are progressing will be in close to 12 months.