Reds 2014

[Train Without a Station]

diabolical is a massive exaggeration. We have been comprehensively beaten in one game. We have had 3 losses by 3 points and 2 by approximately 10. 5 of the teams that have beaten us are in the top 6 I believe (Could be off the mark here and it's only 4).

I'm not saying our form is great, adequate or acceptable. Just no need for these dramatics.

 

[Scrubber2050]

TWAS
Good points. In respect of your point 2. I think RG needs to stamp his authority on the group and one of the most effective means is to jettison a highly paid player who has not consistently performed for 2 years. - this sends a clear message to the rest of the group (that no-one is expendable)

 

[I like to watch]

It's those 3 point games that define a season IMO.
My recollection of your 2011 year was,that not only did you guys win 3 or 4 of those games,you won them at the death.
Had the a Reds lost even 2 of the close games that they won in 2011,they have a completely different season.
And it's not just the effect the results have on the table,it changes the dynamic of the side.
Look how the Farce,have morphed into the Force after a couple of tight wins.

 

[RedsHappy]

I have noticed throughout this season that some posters here seem to have inadvertently forgotten just how the QRU recovered from a very recent de facto bankruptcy in 2009 and then rapidly built a membership and average game attendance base of 30,000+ persons. Here's how it happened:

1. Late 2009: New coach and CEO, both 'imports' from well outside the hallowed halls of the QLD rugby system.

2. 2010: New coach rebuilds morale and playing standards with the team, and the teams responds with a great new totality of playing style underpinned by some obviously gifted flair-laden players. The 2010 Reds start slaying giants at home, convincingly (who will ever forget that defining moment; Reds beat Bulls at Suncorp April 2010). Crowds start to build.

2. 2010's achievements rapidly consolidate and indeed flourish further in 2011. The best of the team's new found all-of-team skills and clever, well executed variations in play and game plan (see Stormers win away) secure a very high w-l ratio and finally a Title. Naturally, crowds and sponsorship and membership levels build rapidly to profitable levels. Viewership of Reds game on Foxtel achieves materially higher levels than for many other S15 teams and all Oz teams.

3. 2012 -13: Excellent business management and skills - often drawn from the AFL's best practices - see a consistent membership level built and solid code expansion plans implemented in QLD. The teams w-l ratio begins a decline but the Reds are still able to pull of some impressive wins (see Chiefs, home and aways and ditto Tahs) and thus Finals berths are secured and membership and crowd attendance levels hold firm, mostly. The QRU stays in profit, but at lower levels and total gate income falls off v 2011.

Surely it can be seen from the above that the the current QRU financial and fan-level viability derives solely from:

- excellence of team coaching and a player roster capable of responding to and delivering results from that and

- ditto competent business and commercial management and

- lots of exciting rugby but above all a more or less constant stream of high w-l %s, especially at home

The corollary being that once these parameters markedly change and the team turns badly downhill, a marked decline in the QRU's financial and commercial viability will surely result, especially as the recent Reds business success is clearly built upon many 'new', vs rusted-on, fans of the code and team. (Note too btw that the QRU has taken on a large St George bank loan in recent times.) With the rest of Aus rugby being in an utterly parlous state financially and commercially, this is truly a very concerning prospect not just for QLD rugby, but for the entire code in this country.

When Wayne Smith (see article in post above) says:

The team that for a brief moment captured the imagination of world rugby is shrinking before our eyes.

.... a chill certainly went down my spine as I realised what many of my fellow paying Reds members - and many other fans who fell in love with QLD rugby often for the first time - must be thinking as they watch the team's rapid decline into rabble-like mediocrity based upon a lack of inner conviction and a total absence of flair that excites and thrills.

 

[Scrubber2050]

RedsHappy - just an excellant incisive post

 

[Parse]

Sure, it's been a mediocre season but the Reds are headed for a mid table finish.

Below their standards? Yes, but if you stuck through the bad years then why draw a line in the sand now?

Because during the bad years we saw them try a few different coaches, give new guys a chance - they tried to get things going better. It just was that the guys trying it were not really up to the task or did not have the resources or whatever, but they were trying. Between 2006 and 2009 we had 3 different coaches!

Now we have a situation were they appear to be in denial and don't want to make changes.

I'm not happy supporting an organisation that doesn't want to make changes to make themselves better.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Give it a rest Parse. A merry go round of coaches is never leads to anything good. That was part of the reason for our extended time at the bottom.

It's been something like 7 games and you are advocating that the coach should be changed? Fucking stupid. That sort of action breeds a culture of players knowing they are bigger than the coach. If they don't instantly buy into what he's saying they just dissent or cruise until he's punted and see if they like the next guy.

I'm not even a fan of Graham but some of the talk is getting so ridiculous for the sake of balance I feel like defending him.

If the Reds are a good sporting organisation I'd hope they are looking to see what options are available and measuring RG's progress based on the options they have to replace him with and a decent period of time to asses.

Personally I doubt he'll be there next year but I'm never a fan of sacking a bloke on the basis that anybody else must surely be better, rather than seeing somebody else and thinking they are better.

 

[RugbyReg]

Because during the bad years we saw them try a few different coaches, give new guys a chance - they tried to get things going better. It just was that the guys trying it were not really up to the task or did not have the resources or whatever, but they were trying. Between 2006 and 2009 we had 3 different coaches!

Now we have a situation were they appear to be in denial and don't want to make changes.

I'm not happy supporting an organisation that doesn't want to make changes to make themselves better.

you're suggesting it was a good thing? It was the major reason we lost so many players. They were sick of playing under different coaches every year.

Look I am as concerned as the next guy as to the performances of the team but to suggest it is a succesful strategy to roll through coaches if they don't succeed in the first year is a very Waratah approach to it all.

I'd suggest this is a massive reality check for GRaham in his first year as Reds HC. I don't think it would be fair to cut him loose after this year. I have no doubt there will be significant changes in both the on and off-field team this off-season. We've heard that there will be player changes, but I reckon there will be some staffing changes or at least approaches.

2015 will be the season I reckon we can truly judge Graham and co on though.

A belief that i know won't be popular here.

 

[Juan Cote]

The reaction from the Reds exec to Richard Graham's lack of success is scarily similar to the way the ARU let Robbie Deans continue despite his obvious shortcomings.
Is it that the Reds Board and CEO are not prepared to question their wisdom in appointing a coach who isn't getting the best out of his players?
As Deans' downhill spiral continued, so did the justifications for poor performances - lack of player depth, injuries to key players, quoting selective stats, team unable to stick to a game plan et al.
It appears the Reds have dusted of the ARU crisis management model and are implementing it to the letter.
Whether RG is a good coach or a poor coach is not up for question here. What is up for question is why he cannot seem to get the best performance out of the players?
Why can't he, who knows? There is plenty of speciation as to why but the fact is it doesn't really matter.
What matters is performance and RG is directly responsible for that.
The reason for the Reds success of recent years were the hard decision that were made, it's not a time for soft-shoeing now.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Juan you could be right. Or they could just be being cautious, and not hanging their coach out to dry after 7 games with no viable replacement around.

 

[No4918]

Could Laurie Fisher be an option. Head coach sounds better than co-coach.

 

[lex]

Could Laurie Fisher be an option. Head coach sounds better than co-coach.

..........but not as good as "Director of Rugby".

 

[Ignoto]

We've heard that there will be player changes, but I reckon there will be some staffing changes or at least approaches.

From memory, RG brought most if not all of his backroom coaches with him over the last 12 months. Wouldn't sacking them be similar to getting rid of RG ie very Tahaseque!

 

[Set piece magic]

Idiot.
You can't get decent coffee in the Rocks.
Anyway, what's this got to do with us?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I admit it I have been found out trying to combine several stereotypes. But I digress. Reds just totally lack mungrel and desire to score tries at the moment.

We seem to fuckup as soon as we get within 40m of the try line.

Handling, kicking, size and creativity is a problem. In fact everything is a problem.

We are using an outdated game plan that is too 1 dimensional, we never threaten off set piece, we don't go forward in general play as a result of one out runners trying to get over the gain line themselves and then being too light. This leaves us no option to kick and kick to who??? Why Savea, or Jane, or Folau, or Cummins, or Mogg, or Dagg or whoever other world class back three is running back at our disorganised defense

 

[RugbyReg]

From memory, RG brought most if not all of his backroom coaches with him over the last 12 months. Wouldn't sacking them be similar to getting rid of RG ie very Tahaseque!

nah, he brought Stiles and Meehan and I am not talking about them (and remembering Meehan started very late - November I think), but there are other areas that were decided on very late that limited his ability to choose the rest of the staff.

Damian Marsh made his decision to leave quite late, which impacted on the appointment of a replacement. In the end Richard may have stuck with who he has now, but the timing of it meant he didn't have options otherwise.

 

[Redsfan]

According to Twitter, Gill is back! Hurray!

 

[Scrubber2050]

Lucky for RG the Reds don't play Poof Ball - he would have been sacked after the third loss.

 

[Scoey]

If you have to use a derogatory term maybe give it a quick edit and go for dive ball or something @Scrubber2050

 

[RedsHappy]

Could Laurie Fisher be an option. Head coach sounds better than co-coach.

I think he could well be. Though personally at a pinch I'd rather see L Fisher as Forwards and Setpiece Coach for the Wallabies.

And btw: the credit to J White for the Brums dramatic revival increases twofold when we see how successful his two appointed key assistant coaches are when promoted this year to follow on from him. If anything, the Brums are an even better side this year than last. The calibre of a leader's support staff in an elite sports team is typically as important as his/her own.

This is but one of the many reasons I find the emerging 'let's give RG plenty more room to show what he's made of' argument problematic. In an almost unprecedented manner, RG had the whole of 2013 as Head Coach under Link to 'learn the winning Reds ways', 'get to know the squad in depth', 'plan out his own support staff', etc. A highly generous running-in period to enable him to make major improvements in the 2014 Reds squad and performance, or at the very worst, to keep the 2014 team at 2013's level of performance.

Instead, perhaps barring some minor improvement in the scrum, we have seen virtually every single dimension of Reds play deteriorate in 2014 vs 2013. The new theory emerging from Ballymore and their anointed media mates seems to be that this is principally due to the failures of the players and their chronic inability to implement RG's robust game plans of merit.

Comparing the ongoing tolerance for RG to go forth unaltered into 2015 to the fact that M Foley is, in his second year only, making major improvements to the Force is not apt. In 2013 Foley inherited a total mess: RG was booted away in anger and resentment in mid-2012, the Force players were naturally highly disillusioned with the whole setup, many squad members were leaving, the team had experienced yet another very poor year of w-l %, RugbyWA after years of poor crowd levels was experiencing severe financial constraints, and so on. Total Rock Bottom may understate what Foley had to rebuild with/from in 2013. This was massively different to the state of affairs of the Reds squad and culture and QRU stability upon RG's arrival in 2013 and then into 2014.

 

[RedsHappy]

Juan you could be right. Or they could just be being cautious, and not hanging their coach out to dry after 7 games with no viable replacement around.

TWAS, good point and you could well be correct.

However, the very recent emanations from the QRU Chair and CEO do seem unambiguously of the order that RG is here to stay, come what may in terms of 2014's results. If they were bets-hedging I think the tone would be 'supportive' and 'transition is always challenging' and such like banalities but would not extend to the fulsome endorsements of RG's tenure we have seen given to the major QRU media boys.