Next Wallabies Coach.

[Slim 293]

Your problem is you think rugby is a mathematical equation; that if team A beats B, and B has beaten C, then A is definitely going to beat C too.

Er, if I thought that way I'd be the one suggesting that South Africa's run was easy because they didn't play NZ or Aus...........

 

[It is what it is]

Much of the perception about what several countries have done successfully style-wise is indeed myth.

My concern is the priorities. Winning needs to be at the top.

If you decide that the best path to winning is that you never kick, then fine.

But deciding how much you will kick before you figure out how to win is just stupid, and that's what it seems like happens in this country.

The Wallabies are also in the entertainment business.
Here in Australia they are in the most competitive winter sporting market on the planet per capita.
They are not just competing on the field.
They are competing for sponsors, merchandise sales, TV rights and fans and the way the result is achieved is important.
Determining a style of play dictates everything from who you get to coach you, who you recruit, and how you train.
Do you understand that there are different types of kicking?
The AB's are masters of attacking kicking and rarely kick defensively.
Did you not witness the Tahs adopt a ball in hand style over 2 years, still kick, but take on and beat teams with a wide range of styles?
Do you not notice the differences in genetics and body shapes between Sth Africans and Aussies, or the leg power difference of English teams over Aussies?

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Pretty bummed that Bernie knocked it back. If we are to change the coaching setup (and the reality is that we have to after last weekends events) then the triumvirate approach seemed to be the best way to go forward. We still need a backs coach, so I wonder who will step up then?

 

[Train Without a Station]

TWAS, You'd never admit that a jakeball style was the superior option even if we had the players for it and didn't have the players for ball-in-hand.

You base that on the fact that I don't consider it the superior option when even you imply we don't have the players for it?

Fatprop hit the nail on the head. You can throw about 5 quality players on the team sheet to play Jake Ball and be successful.

Right now it's more to play ball in hand, with astute kicking when required.

Even the Waratahs who had a strong pack, struggled in their set piece at times, which you need to perform well.

 

[Tom Ando]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...-stephen-larkham/story-e6frg7o6-1227097166701 If no one has seen it

 

[MarkJ]

The Brubmies Achilles heel at times has been defeating teams better than them though. That's why they missed the finals in the first year after all.

No, they missed the finals that year because they choked against the bottom-placed Blues in the last round

 

[Lorenzo]

The Wallabies are also in the entertainment business.
Here in Australia they are in the most competitive winter sporting market on the planet per capita.
They are not just competing on the field.
They are competing for sponsors, merchandise sales, TV rights and fans and the way the result is achieved is important.
Determining a style of play dictates everything from who you get to coach you, who you recruit, and how you train.
Do you understand that there are different types of kicking?
The AB's are masters of attacking kicking and rarely kick defensively.
Did you not witness the Tahs adopt a ball in hand style over 2 years, still kick, but take on and beat teams with a wide range of styles?
Do you not notice the differences in genetics and body shapes between Sth Africans and Aussies, or the leg power difference of English teams over Aussies?

That's all fine, but irrelevant.

The saffas and ABs want to win. I don't think there can be any dispute about that.

I don't think we make it the same priority.

 

[Viking]

How's it stupid? Don't say he just wanted to coach the Wallabies. He came within a whisker of leaving before his first season even started when talk of the England offer came through.

White's reasons were that he was passed over for another role, which he had no guarantee of. I don't get how that reason is valid. If he wanted to be closer to his family, why was he happy to come here for 3 years to begin with, and then considerably more if he became the Wallabies coach?

Yes and he came out and said he wouldn't take the England role if offered it as he had commitments at the Brumbies he would honour.

He came to Brumbies with a goal turn them into title contenders and he achieved that goal.

Why come here for 3 years, in order to put him in a good place to become wallabies coach. It's not his fault he didn't realise it would be harder then he predicted to be away from family.

He obviously left the Brumbies feeling he accomplished everything he needed too.

How is the reason not valid? He left because staying at the Brumbies was giving him no career benefit and staying was giving the Brumbies no benefit.

 

[Lorenzo]

You base that on the fact that I don't consider it the superior option when even you imply we don't have the players for it?

Fatprop hit the nail on the head. You can throw about 5 quality players on the team sheet to play Jake Ball and be successful.

Right now it's more to play ball in hand, with astute kicking when required.

Even the Waratahs who had a strong pack, struggled in their set piece at times, which you need to perform well.

I don't imply we don't have the players for it.

Indeed I think the possession game is an even worse option behind a beaten pack. We might aswell play the game up the other end if the forwards are going to get dominated.

How well does ball-in-hand go behind a pack that can't get parity?

About 50% and 1 from 10 against the SAs and ABs, that's how well.

 

[Lorenzo]

But the more I read this board the more I think many posters are happy as long as we win half our tests, their favourite players get picked and the ball gets chucked around enough for the odd rugby HQ highlight

 

[Ulrich]

Urlich I disagree on the talent.

If this was England, or Ireland, that would be different. They are physically stronger, but lack the speed and athleticism of some of our players.

Players who have been some of our best kickers at provincial level have been shown to be lacking in execution at test level (To'omua and White). Our next best option has had the worst season of his career (Mogg). Folau is clearly our best fullback and is a superior running option than kicking. Cooper is our best 10 and is a better running player than kicker. He can astutely kick for territory but lacks the booming boot of To'omua. We have lacked a consistent class goal kicker at international level since Flatley retired.

To play a Jake-ball style would mean playing closer to our weaknesses than strengths.

I really understand your sentiment and I will once again, apologetically this time, refer to South African examples to illustrate my take on the matter.

First of all, each coach has an ability and certain players suit certain coaches so as much as Cooper may be a running option he may not even be someone to discuss with another coach.

The fact that White can't kick for Ewen doesn't mean he won't be able to kick for Jake. Coaches bring out the best in players and coaches also coach players.

Bryan Habana had a great stint at the Bulls in Meyer's era, scoring plenty tries. So he also did for the Springboks under White.

When he joined the Stormers he hardly ever scored and he didn't have the most success under PDV for the Springboks either.

In comes Meyer and suddenly he starts scoring tries again and looking much more like his old self, obviously lacking his old pace.

Morne Steyn had a lull and Meyer eventually kept thim in the squad but didn't play him, instead focusing on the player's physical and mental health. Thereafter Morne returned to his prodigious kicking form.

He was part of the Bulls setup when he signed Pollard as a 16 year old. WP weren't even aware of what they were losing despite what they say.

What this means is that it shouldn't surprise anyone if Australia had a new set of heroes under a coach such as White because it's entirely possible that he would unearth some talent most consider not to be there and shape them from rough diamonds into something special.

 

[TahDan]

Er, if I thought that way I'd be the one suggesting that South Africa's run was easy because they didn't play NZ or Aus.....

Touche - although I'd argue that's never been my point. Rather, my point is this reverence for White on the back of his RWC win is misplaced given that it fails to take into account his easy run and the fact that between 2006 and 2008 the boks came last in the TN.

 

[Train Without a Station]

You don't need a dominant pack. You need a fit hard working pack. Look at the Reds pack in 2011.

Possession isn't lost through lack of dominance in contact at the breakdown. It's lost through poor technique and supporting isolating tackled players.

 

[Scoey]

I can't seem to keep up with the pace of these threads the last couple of weeks, so can someone point out if you've covered off on the likelihood of Chieka being both Wallabies and Tahs coach next year and the drama's that will bring?

 

[Viking]

I can't seem to keep up with the pace of these threads the last couple of weeks, so can someone point out if you've covered off on the likelihood of Chieka being both Wallabies and Tahs coach next year and the drama's that will bring?

Well it looks like Cheika will be coach of the wallabies and the Tahs next year. And that is going to bring all sorts of problems.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Yes. Repeatedly. To the point of the threat of bans.

 

[Ulrich]

Touche - although I'd argue that's never been my point. Rather, my point is this reverence for White on the back of his RWC win is misplaced given that it fails to take into account his easy run and the fact that between 2006 and 2008 the boks came last in the TN.

2008 was PDV era, that's completely on him.

 

[TahDan]

2008 was PDV era, that's completely on him.

I know, but it's also the year immediately following the RWC win, and thus the old structures were still partially in place. The first year of a coach is always partially a legacy of his predecessor.

 

[Braveheart81]

But the more I read this board the more I think many posters are happy as long as we win half our tests, their favourite players get picked and the ball gets chucked around enough for the odd rugby HQ highlight

That's such a load of crap mate.

Not agreeing with you that Jake White was the best person for the Wallabies coaching job does not correlate with caring less about winning in any way whatsoever.

Look at it this way. If Jake White was made coach, adopted the style of game he likes to coach and the Wallabies end up no more successful than they currently are but are playing in a style less attractive to fans, how do you think it will end up for Australian rugby?

 

[Scoey]

I thought as much. Lucky I didn't say anything then!

I'll go back and try and find the discussion then. I need to top my rage levels.