Coaching Options for Qld Rugby

[kiap]

Link wasn't resigning in early 2012, he didn't leave or even hint he intended to leave the QRU's embrace . . .

When the topic becomes boring you need to look harder. Rugby politics is like real politics except smaller.

JON had run out of tricks by 2012. Link's Campaign Wallaby was underway as early as February. O'Neill:

''If you're a Super Rugby coach, and don't have ambitions to coach the Wallabies, it would be unusual. But two years is a pretty long time in rugby. And it's not very useful to have a whole lot of speculation about what is going to happen sometime at the back end of 2013. Attaching odds on whether Robbie will stay on, versus Ewen McKenzie, Michael Foley or whoever taking over is just pointless.''​

​

''It is also pointless to be campaigning when you should be concentrating on your day job. There's no point hitting the tom tom drums and saying you're ready, when a decision is two years away.''​

​

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...taff-report-20120206-1r1xj.html#ixzz1lnI4EsD8​

 

[Train Without a Station]

'Everybody' (in yr second sentence) ?? You mean one or two Internet posters here don't you?

My point is that both the full contextual evidence and the many statements-to-media evidence of the relevant time period point markedly to the conclusion that Link was fully and heavily involved with RG's selection and positively desired and endorsed it.

Those positing the alternative historical view - that Link was almost exclusively uninterested in the RG chosing process, and/or that Link had the RG appointment foisted upon him by cronies-at-all-cost QRU board, have produced zero even anecdotal evidence to support that contention.

That's because people with integrity don't go bad mouthing past employers.

My evidence is the bloke ate a fucking shit sandwich at the Waratahs, and again at the Wallabies and hasn't said shit.

Seems perfectly in line with his character and history to accept the situation at the Reds, work with it while he is there, and move on without any complaint.

What do you want? An article from 2012 quoting Link saying "Nah I reckon it's a fucked idea bringing Woody on. fluffybunny couldn't coach a dog to shit."?

Even among people lacking any integrity, you aren't going to find that.

 

[TOCC]

Who cares if link endorsed it or not, what you people are arguing is purely speculative with no sources or informed persons to inform otherwise..
In either case it doesn't change the fact that RG is the coach today and has been for the past 18months..






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hugh Jarse]

We need to move on from speculation about Link and his relationship with RG at the time of his appointment. There has already been enough crap spread about Link, mostly third hand. Little wonder he has left rugby.

 

[Gnostic]

That's because people with integrity don't go bad mouthing past employers.

My evidence is the bloke ate a fucking shit sandwich at the Waratahs, and again at the Wallabies and hasn't said shit.

Seems perfectly in line with his character and history to accept the situation at the Reds, work with it while he is there, and move on without any complaint.

What do you want? An article from 2012 quoting Link saying "Nah I reckon it's a fucked idea bringing Woody on. fluffybunny couldn't coach a dog to shit."?

Even among people lacking any integrity, you aren't going to find that.

You've mixed up integrity with self interest. People with integrity tell the truth. At the very worst say nothing at all, given you have to work with in poor structures on so many occasions. It isn't integrity to be silent though, it is self interest, if the issues have been raised and the employer chooses not to address the problems. That isn't a negative as we all have to look after ourselves and our families first and foremost but it shouldn't be dressed up as something it is not.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Daryl Gibson is pretty much a lock for the Tah's job right?

 

[TOCC]

You've mixed up integrity with self interest. People with integrity tell the truth. At the very worst say nothing at all, given you have to work with in poor structures on so many occasions. It isn't integrity to be silent though, it is self interest, if the issues have been raised and the employer chooses not to address the problems. That isn't a negative as we all have to look after ourselves and our families first and foremost but it shouldn't be dressed up as something it is not.

So in a nutshell your saying Link is looking out for himself by not saying anything, and that if he had any integrity he would come out and ridicule his past employers...

Give me a break... This is nothing more speculative bullshit... Self interest is sitting on a computer slandering someone hiding behind an pseudonym just to give yourself a little gratification for the day.. Integrity would be to put your name to paper and raise this issue directly with link..




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brendan Hume]

GAGR's (formerly) own Scott Allen maybe should put up his hand. His game analysis is great. I reckon he could be guaranteed to at least come up with a game plan that suits the team and that could be executed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Train Without a Station]

You've mixed up integrity with self interest. People with integrity tell the truth. At the very worst say nothing at all, given you have to work with in poor structures on so many occasions. It isn't integrity to be silent though, it is self interest, if the issues have been raised and the employer chooses not to address the problems. That isn't a negative as we all have to look after ourselves and our families first and foremost but it shouldn't be dressed up as something it is not.

So towing the company line, and then maintaining silence once departed with nothing left to gain is self interest, and shitbagging the place when gone with only negative to create (perhaps in an Eddie Jones like manner) is integrity.

Got it.

I've quite missed a lot of this brilliant insight on gagr.

 

[gel]

There are two types of analysts: those can formulate a plan and visualise trends after in depth investigation, And those who can identify trends and faults instantly. It is rare to find one with both skill sets.

I think the head coach absolutely needs to be the latter, because they can send out the instructions during the game to modify the teams play to accomodate the changes that are happening during the game. The former needs to be in makeup though as they will do the hard yards during the week.

I love Scott Allen's analysis pieces and he shows great insight into the game. Given his role with the uni team, does anyone know what sort of analyst he is? I do remember him mentioning one of the reasons he started to analyse the video footage was in order to improve his ability to pick up what was happening realtime. - but maybe I misinterpreted what he was saying (or even imagined him saying it and it was someone else).

 

[Wilson]

Daryl Gibson is pretty much a lock for the Tah's job right?

If he doesn't get it I'd expect to see him at the crusaders or the blues next year before the reds. Hopefully he does get it, he's probably the only candidate for the tahs job that isn't an option for us.

 

[RugbyReg]

GAGR's (formerly) own Scott Allen maybe should put up his hand. His game analysis is great. I reckon he could be guaranteed to at least come up with a game plan that suits the team and that could be executed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice guy Scotty, knows his stuff. But he's not even coaching at the moment. Don't think he's been head coach of any top level team, and by top level I am stretching that to mean Premier Grade.

Massive step up from Premier Grade. Not sure any of those could make the leap straight to Super Rugby HC.

 

[Athilnaur]

If he doesn't get it I'd expect to see him at the crusaders or the blues next year before the reds. Hopefully he does get it, he's probably the only candidate for the tahs job that isn't an option for us.

That would be good news for the Blues and a loss for Aussie rugby in my opinion. Gibson has the mana and insight, I believe, to take the potent athletic talent at the Blues and weld it into a cohesive team that chooses it's moments of attack.

On the Reds, won't happen but I'd like to see Mooney get another shot. His style of game got me to be a Reds fan. McKenzie is a very good coach, but the foundations in terms of squad and gameplay was there when he arrived and for mine it was fading fast by 2012.

 

[Floggn']

Mooney won't happen. He never seemed to get players respect or backing which in the end was the death of him. After reading the Australian today about how RG is safe because of injuries I have decided not to attend Saturday night. I am absolutely disgusted in the QRU that they have their head so far stuck in the sand they won't listen to the biggest support base in either rugby code. I hope we win and I am wrong but the reality looks very different and we will be having the same discussion next week we were having 8 months ago that RG isn't up to the job.

 

[Braveheart81]

Mooney won't happen. He never seemed to get players respect or backing which in the end was the death of him. After reading the Australian today about how RG is safe because of injuries I have decided not to attend Saturday night. I am absolutely disgusted in the QRU that they have their head so far stuck in the sand they won't listen to the biggest support base in either rugby code. I hope we win and I am wrong but the reality looks very different and we will be having the same discussion next week we were having 8 months ago that RG isn't up to the job.

So you're basing your decision on a newspaper article?

RG is clearly coaching the Reds this week. If the QRU were thinking of sacking him if they have another bad loss this weekend do you really think they'd announce that this week?

Richard Graham will have the full support of the board until about 15 minutes before they sack him.

 

[Floggn']

Braveheart I understand the board always support the coach. But to be honest I am sick of the BS. Why not just say; we need to do better, injuries haven't helped us but our performance from the players to the coaches need to be far improved. I am not basing my opinion or decision on a Newspaper article but what the Chairman of the board said. They trundled out the same shit near the end of last season when anyone with half a rugby brain could tell that RG wasn't up to the job. They need to grow some balls and do something now even it means Stilesy runs the show until they have a coach in round 8 which is still my bet.

 

[TheBigDog]

Agreed Braveheart, RG is in no way 'safe'. As I posted in the Reds 2015 thread, my mail tells me the knives are out for him at QRU headquarters but only behind closed doors at this stage. Everyone is playing nice to the press to try and suppress the riots that are happening within the fan base but a loss this weekend, no matter how big or small will most likely see everything change.

 

[Jets]

I like Howard as the coaching option. He did well in England and I think his experience at the ARU and CA would be a big advantage.

He wants to be based in Brisbane but the travel might be a factor with his young family.

 

[Floggn']

Bigdog I think them playing nice with RG is increasing the riots in the fan base not suppressing it.

 

[TheBigDog]

I agree Floggn' but its the mentality the QRU have at the moment. They realise they've f**ked up but don't want to admit fault yet and now are waiting until they can fully throw the current coaching staff under the bus. Unfortunately, for us as fans that point was essentially at the end of 2014 but the blokes who make the decisions are only just getting around to it now.