ARU wants to select who coaches

[Gagger]

I don't believe that it's a requirement to appoint a coach to manage the S&C of all the players in Australia..

We can see that the Reds in 2011 and Brumbies in 2012 were two of the fittest teams in the comp.. The knowledge and will to achieve the required conditioning levels is present within Australian Rugby, it's just not known/understood by all.

If anything, it might be wise to pool resources and share some of the information to other provinces in addition to a means of implementing it.

As Laurie Fisher said in the last podslam, different team game plans will demand different S&C - rightly or wrongly (looking at you Tahs)

So it's not one size will fit all. If those discrepancies exist and it doesn't suit the way the National team will want to play, then something needs to be able to happen.

 

[TOCC]

As Laurie Fisher said in the last podslam, different team game plans will demand different S&C - rightly or wrongly (looking at you Tahs)

So it's not one size will fit all. If those discrepancies exist and it doesn't suit the way the National team will want to play, then something needs to be able to happen.

I think diversification at super rugby level is a good thing, coaches struggle to see how new rule interpretations will impact on the game, each coach handles it differently, some are obviously more successful then others...

Who says the ARU appointed expert Is going to be right in terms of how the game is evolving.... By diversifying at club level(ie leaving it up to the super rugby coaches) you have different options in case it goes differently to how it's predicted..

I don't see how a national coordinator dictating terms of a players training is going to positively benefit the super rugby side.

 

[Richo]

Agreed. The only problem is when one team -- ahem -- ends up wildly unfit. It would be good to see teams meet some kind of S&C standard, even if there is a lot of flexibility for focusing on different areas. The debacle of the Tahs not doing enough fitness work preseason should never have happened.

 

[cyclopath]

As Laurie Fisher said in the last podslam, different team game plans will demand different S&C - rightly or wrongly (looking at you Tahs)

So it's not one size will fit all. If those discrepancies exist and it doesn't suit the way the National team will want to play, then something needs to be able to happen.

Sure, there will be tweaks to fit different structures and game plans. But I still think a "better" S&C template can be broadly applied. I am still trying to work out what style of play was ideally supported by the Tahs S&C efforts this year.
No, wait, I got it now.

 

[Brumby Jack]

I heard from a source that the new Wallabies S & C guy said that he would want the Tahs S & C staff to take his job should he leave any time soon.

Interesting...

 

[TOCC]

I'm adamantly opposed to any kind of template been imposed on the unions. I believe that there should be more knowledge sharing imposed by the ARU, what teams choose to do with that is up to them..

Thats purely my opinion...

 

[cyclopath]

I'm adamantly opposed to any kind of template been imposed on the unions. I believe that there should be more knowledge sharing imposed by the ARU, what teams choose to do with that is up to them..

Thats purely my opinion.

Well, a broad template for how S & C can be better done is really trying to improve the knowledge base across all teams. They key word is broad. A cookie-cutter is not the idea, but a more general structure and principles. Not that far from what you suggest.

 

[TOCC]

Well, a broad template for how S & C can be better done is really trying to improve the knowledge base across all teams. They key word is broad. A cookie-cutter is not the idea, but a more general structure and principles. Not that far from what you suggest.

And what's it going to say that clubs don't already know they should be doing?

Its ludicrous to think that the clubs don't have the best intentions as heart when they undertake there training, it's just varying levels of knowledge and experience which Impact on the final outcome.

 

[Gagger]

Who says the ARU appointed expert Is going to be right in terms of how the game is evolving.. By diversifying at club level(ie leaving it up to the super rugby coaches) you have different options in case it goes differently to how it's predicted..

I'm not saying they'll get it right, but by definition they will (or should) have a way they want to play - they have only one team!

Yes, super teams should be able to all play/try different things, but if they're my Wallabies cattle, I'd wanna know what's going on and implement change if I needed to.

Note - I'm only talking about S&C here

 

[fatprop]

I think diversification at super rugby level is a good thing, coaches struggle to see how new rule interpretations will impact on the game, each coach handles it differently, some are obviously more successful then others.

Who says the ARU appointed expert Is going to be right in terms of how the game is evolving.. By diversifying at club level(ie leaving it up to the super rugby coaches) you have different options in case it goes differently to how it's predicted..

I don't see how a national coordinator dictating terms of a players training is going to positively benefit the super rugby side.

diversification is a lovely concept, but there are some obvious fundamentals that could, and should, be a consistent focus across all the franchises. Those fundamentals include S&C, cleanout technique, height at ruck & maul, kicking skills, scrummaging, the contestability philosophy, workrate expectations etc etc.

There are still a lot of scope for different styles, that a fit team with the basics of contesting every ball, at every contact and works for eachother off the ball can utilise.

 

[TOCC]

diversification is a lovely concept, but there are some obvious fundamentals that could, and should, be a consistent focus across all the franchises. Those fundamentals include S&C, cleanout technique, height at ruck & maul, kicking skills, scrummaging, the contestability philosophy, workrate expectations etc etc.

There are still a lot of scope for different styles, that a fit team with the basics of contesting every ball, at every contact and works for eachother off the ball can utilise.

We were talking purely about S&C, many of those points you raise are technical coaching issues and are another subject again...

 

[fatprop]

We were talking purely about S&C, many of those points you raise are technical coaching issues and are another subject again.

they all fit into the general tenants of a good rugby side

 

[TOCC]

No doubt..

But you quoted me in reference to diversification and that was strictly talking about the S&C aspect of the game.

 

[Badger]

He said no.

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/mclachlan-knocks-back-league-20120904-25c1c.html

Don't blame him. Given a choice I would prefer the AFL CEO role rather than the RL one. Lot more hassles to deal with in RL than AFL which also has the bigger footprint across the country.

 

[dangerousdave]

Maybe not, but other coaches might have moved him into the 12 jersey when gateau's form took an extended nose dive.

And I think that if they had done that JOC (James O'Connor) wouldn't be the player he is now. Richard Graham stated on the podcast a while back that he thinks wing is JOC (James O'Connor)'s best position. I think that at least for the first few years for his wallaby career this was the best place for him to be playing. It allowed him to somewhat choose his involvements in the game, use his pace. Would crashing into Nonu et. al. have been the best use for somebody with that much pace? Maybe at this point in his career moving to 12 might make sense, but I definitely don't think it would have been a good idea a couple of years ago.

 

[Aussie D]

No doubt..

But you quoted me in reference to diversification and that was strictly talking about the S&C aspect of the game.

TOCC, I think you are missing Fatprop's point. You can play different styles of rugby but whatever style you choose to play the basics will stay the same. If all the Oz Super Rugby sides were taught the basics in the same way it would be better for the Wallabies as all players would be singing from the same proverbial song sheet. The individual head coaches of the Super Rugby sides could then apply those basics to whatever game plan best suits their individual teams' strength.

 

[Linebacker_41]

It would be good to see teams meet some kind of S&C standard, even if there is a lot of flexibility for focusing on different areas. .

Thanks Richo - I agree!

There should be minimum standards that the Wallabies set for selection. As such the S&C National program should communicate clearly to the states what the players are expected to achieve at the Wallaby level. This would include testing days built in during the season to ensure that potential Wallabies are up-to-scratch.

Now if the state program doesnt deliver that minimum standard then the Wallabies can clearly point out how their state team has let their players down.

However this could also allow the flexibilty at the state level to have different focuses.

To be clear - this does not mean that the bar is excessively high that allows for only one approach however it would mean that poor programs, as appears to have been in the case in one or more of the states this year, are held in check by their players aspiring to higher honours.

 

[Lee Enfield]

I heard from a source that the new Wallabies S & C guy said that he would want the Tahs S & C staff to take his job should he leave any time soon.

Interesting.

Wasn't the players demanding an easier pre season and Foley caving into their demands, the reason for the Waratahs poor fitness. The Waratah S & C coaches could very well be among the best going around, but if the head coach tells you to go easier on the players, well, you hands are tied.
I am only going on what I have read, but it seems the blame for the Waratahs fitness lays at feet of the players and FOley.

 

[TOCC]

TOCC, I think you are missing Fatprop's point. You can play different styles of rugby but whatever style you choose to play the basics will stay the same. If all the Oz Super Rugby sides were taught the basics in the same way it would be better for the Wallabies as all players would be singing from the same proverbial song sheet. The individual head coaches of the Super Rugby sides could then apply those basics to whatever game plan best suits their individual teams' strength.

no i get what his saying, and fair enough if thats what he wants to discuss... But he quoted me when i was talking purely about S&C, im not disputing that the teams need the basic skills(god help us)... However rather then me explain what i was talking about just read back through my comments

 

[Rugrat]

I think this discussion is verging on undervalueing the fundamental view that players have to be held responsible for doing the extras to improve not just maintain there position in the pecking order. All this talk of S and C and allocating coachs and in turn controlling game plans is over valuing those roles and not putting the spot light on players taking personnal responsibilty for their performance. Great athletes and players have self discipline, they have natural ability, they do the work as a team and as an indivdual. They drive an improved individual performance. I hate that we sometimes overvalue some of this coaching preperation and devalue the brilliance or fortitude of the player. Leading the S and C facts and figures doesnt make a player or team great. It is about attitude, a bit of mongrel, desire, killer instinct and football intelligence. Picking players on game performance is critical. When you talk about improving basic skills this comes from individual training but also importantly fringe and development guys playing in a quality competition game, not doing beep tests and holding the tackling bags. Quality competitions creates depth and depth drives improved performance. When Deans says he doesnt look at team performances for selection he is under valuing the fundamental that some players know how to win some dont.